Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Conceptual tempo and auditory-visual temporal-spatial integration 1979

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1979_A8 R38.pdf [ 3.57MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0054491.json
JSON-LD: 1.0054491+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0054491.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0054491+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0054491+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0054491+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0054491.ris

Full Text

CONCEPTUAL TEMPO AND AUDITORY-VISUAL TEMPORAL-SPATIAL INTEGRATION by GURMAL RATTAN B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA July, 1979 ® Gurmal Rattan, 1979 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a V6T 1W5 D E - 6 B P 7 5-5 1 I E ABSTRACT This study explored v a r i a t i o n s of audio-visual information i n t e g r a t - ion patterns and t h e i r r e l a t i o n to conceptual tempo i n a sample of 93 grade four c h i l d r e n . A l l subjects were given nine combinations of audio- v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n (AVI) tasks as well as the Matching Familiar Figures Test. The resultant data was analysed to discover the extent to which the conceptual tempo dimension i s related to information processing patterns. Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i s the question of whether differences i n reading achievement may be traced, i n part, to differences i n information proces- sing p r a c t i c e s . / A m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis indicated no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the four tempo groups ( r e f l e c t i v e s , slow inaccurates, f a s t accurates, and impulsives) on any of the AVI tasks. A one way ANOVA from a post-hoc analysis, however, indicated that r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives d i f f e r e n t i a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y on the reading measure used (Gates-MacGinitie) and that s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s existed between reading and eight of the nine AVI tasks. This indicated that while a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p existed between reading (vocabulary and comprehension) and AVI tasks (p<C..01), and that r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives d i f f e r e n t i a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p .<,. 01) on reading, there was no d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n on any of the AVI tasks. Reasons and implications of these findings are discussed. Supervisor TABLE OF CONTENTS i i i CHAPTER P A G E I INTRODUCTION 1 Background and Rationale 1 The Problem 2 Research Question 5 II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 6 Reflection-Impulsivity 6 Development of the Construct 6 R e l i a b i l i t y 10 Antecedents of the R-I Dimension 13 Correlates of R-I 16 R-I and In t e l l i g e n c e 16 R-I and Anxiety 19 Summary 21 Crossmodal Processing 24 A D e f i n i t i o n 24 Developmental Trends of Intersensory Integration 25 Auditory-Visual Integration and Reading 25 R e l i a b i l i t y 28 Auditory-Visual Temporal-Spatial Integration 29 R-I and Crossmodal Processing 30 R-I and Reading 30 R-I and Auditory-Visual Integration 31 Summary 32 III METHOD 35 Subjects 35 Instruments 37 Materials 42 Procedure 43 CHAPTER i v PAGE IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 45 Results 45 Part One: Data Analysis and Evaluation of Hypothesis 45 Part Two: Post-hoc Analysis 49 Discussion 52 Summary and Implications for Future Research 57 REFERENCES 6L. APPENDICES 68 A Sample item from MFFT 68 B Scoring sheet f o r MFFT 70 C Directions for administering the MFFT 72 D Matching task stimulus patterns f o r AVI tasks 74 E Scoring sheet f o r AVI matching task stimulus patterns .... 77 F M u l t i p l e Regression Analysis • 79 G In t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s of AVI tasks and Reading Measures 81 V LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Performance Measures of the Sample 38 2 Descr i p t i v e S t a t i s t i c s f o r the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Performance Measures for the Four Conceptual Tempo Groups 39 3 M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis of Conceptual Tempo 48 4 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on the Vocabulary Subtest of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test 50 5 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on the Comprehension Subtest of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test 50 6 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on the Non-Verbal 1.0. Measure 51 7 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on Chronological Age 51 v i LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE P A G E 1 Birch and Belmont's Auditory-Visual Test Stimuli 27 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank a l l those who contributed to the completion of thi s t h e s i s . In p a r t i c u l a r , I wish to thank Kathy Lamont for her help i n data c o l l e c t i o n , Dwight Harley for his help i n data a n a l y s i s , and Malcolm Marshall for his c o l l a b o r a t i o n i n t h i s study. I also wish to thank the Delta School D i s t r i c t f o r providing me with a subject pool. I wish to extend a s p e c i a l thanks to my committee members; Dr. Emily Goetz for her assistance i n the organization of thesis material and Dr. Leroy Travis for h i s excellent c r i t i q u e of t h i s thesis and suggestions for improvement. L a s t l y , I wish to thank my adviser, Dr. Derek McLauchlan. His expertise, p r o f e s s i o n a l guidance, and words of encouragement f a c i l i t a t e d an easier d e l i v e r y of t h i s thesis. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background and Rationale In recent years psychological researchers have shown a remarkable upsurge of i n t e r e s t i n human cognitive processes. Neisser (1967) describes these processes as the transformation, reduction, elaboration, storing, recovering, and using of sensory input. In short, these processes i n - volved the synthesis and use of such information. One group of researchers led by Harvard psychologist Jerome Kagan have been p a r t i c u l a r l y interested i n the developmental aspects of perceptual organization and cognitive processing of v i s u a l information. S p e c i f i c a l l y , Kagan, Rosman, Day, Albert, and P h i l l i p s (1964) have used the term "cognitive s t y l e " i n r e f e r r i n g to a stable and consistent mode of perceptual organization and cognitive processing. They have found that subjects respond quite d i f f e r e n t l y when presented with the same v i s u a l stimulus. One group of subjects tend to be a n a l y t i c and deal with the d i f f e r e n t i a t e d parts of a stimulus array. Others deal with information on a more global basis. The a n a l y t i c person was believed to be more e f f i c - ient i n the processes of synthesizing, storing, and r e t r e i v i n g information. Later research, however, indicated that underlying the cognitive styles dimension of analytic/non-analytic was a more fundamental dimension referred to as conceptual tempo. Slower response times on experimental tasks were i n d i c a t i v e of subjects who d i f f e r e n t i a t e d the stimulus array by a systematic consideration of a s o l u t i o n hypothesis on a task where al t e r n a t i v e s were simultaneously a v a i l a b l e . These subjects were c a l l e d r e f l e c t i v e s . 2 Their counterparts, the quick responders, did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e the stimulus array when a l t e r n a t i v e s were presented simultaneously, and they were c a l l e d impulsives. Thus the r u b r i c " r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y " was used to define the above dimension. Studies i n v e s t i g a t i n g r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y have indicated that impulsive c h i l d r e n have problems i n reading, math, scanning a b i l i t y , a t t e n t i o n a l f a c t o r s , and other i n t e l l e c t i v e functions (Epstein, Hallahan & Kaufman, 1975; Messer, 1976). Researchers i n v e s t i g a t i n g the reading a b i l i t y of impulsive c h i l d r e n (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1971; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Readence, 1976) have noted a d e f i n i t e impairment. This may be linked to the v i s u a l modality, r e s u l t i n g from i n e f f i c i e n t scanning and decoding of graphic symbols (Kilburg & Siegel, 1973; Nelson, 1969; Siegel, Keiasic & Kilburg, 1973; Siegelman, 1969). Although researchers have not thoroughly examined the impulsives' aural a b i l i t i e s , d e f i c i t s i n reading have also been linked to t h i s modality (Bond, 1935; C h r i s t i n e & C h r i s t i n e , 1964; Goldent & Steiner, 1969; Wolfe, 1941). The Problem Impulsive c h i l d r e n appear to have d e f i c i t s i n t h e i r perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i , and these d e f i c i t s may be im- p l i c a t e d i n t h e i r reading problems (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1971; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Kagan, 1965b; Margolis, 1976; Readence, 1976; Shapiro, 1976). Researchers i n v e s t i g a t i n g the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y , have given l i t t l e consideration to delineating the perceptual mechanisms of impulsive c h i l d r e n . Accordingly, t h i s study w i l l focus on the auditory- v i s u a l temporal-spatial i n t e g r a t i v e a b i l i t i e s of impulsive c h i l d r e n since 3 these processes appear to be related to the process of reading. S k i l l s required for adequate performance on audit o r y - v i s u a l temporal- s p a t i a l (AVI) tasks are thought to resemble those required i n reading (Beery, 1967; Marshall, 1979; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick, Martin & S t e r r i t t , 1972; S t e r r i t t , Martin & Rudnick, 1971). The a b i l i t y to read requires a number of s u b s k i l l s . Among these are: l ) t h e a b i l i t y to d i s - criminate between d i f f e r e n t sounds and 2)the a b i l i t y to discriminate between d i f f e r e n t l e t t e r s of the alphabet that are organized s p a t i a l l y i n p r i n t (Birch & Belmont, 1964; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Strang, 1968). The a b i l i t y to discriminate between d i f f e r e n t sounds involves an i n t r a - modal i n t e g r a t i o n of aural s t i m u l i , that i s , auditory to auditory (A-A). The a b i l i t y to discriminate between d i f f e r e n t l e t t e r s , involves an i n t r a - modal inte g r a t i o n of v i s u a l s p a t i a l information, that i s , v i s u a l - s p a t i a l to v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (VS-VS); 3)prior to reading, a c h i l d must be able to i d e n t i f y sounds made by d i f f e r e n t graphic symbols ( l e t t e r s ) (Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Strang, 1968). This task i s represented by an intermodal int e g r a t i o n of auditory and v i s u a l - s p a t i a l information, that i s , auditory to v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (A-VS); 4 ) a d d i t i o n a l l y , the c h i l d must also be able to i d e n t i f y d i f f e r e n t graphic symbols with t h e i r appropriate sound(s). This can be represented by an intermodal i n t e g r a t i o n of v i s u a l - s p a t i a l and auditory information, that i s , v i s u a l - s p a t i a l to auditory (VS-A); 5)since a temporal element i s involved f o r the v i s u a l modality ^ due to the sequential process of reading along a l i n e of p r i n t , a v i s u a l - 1 Modality i n t h i s text r e f e r s to the sensory pathways (eg. eyes, ears, touch, etc.) through which external s t i m u l i i s received f o r processing. 4 temporal element i s necessary (Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). This task can be represented by an intramodal i n t e g r a t i o n of a visual-temporal component, that i s , visual-temporal to visual-temporal (VT-VT); 6)since a visual-temporal component i s involved for the v i s u a l recognition of graphic symbols while moving along a l i n e of p r i n t , an intermodal i n t e g r a t i o n task i s necessary. This task can be represented by a visual-temporal and v i s u a l - s p a t i a l information, that i s , v i s u a l - temporal to v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (VT-VS); 7)conversely, v i s u a l recognition of graphic symbols while moving along a l i n e of p r i n t can be represented by v i s u a l - s p a t i a l to visual-temporal (VS-VT) task; 8)when a c h i l d a c t u a l l y reads, the auditory patterns i n speech which are temporally ordered, must be integrated with s p a t i a l l y organized v i s u a l patterns i n p r i n t (Beery, 1967; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). This task can be represented by an intermodal i n t e g r a t i o n of auditory-temporal and visual-temporal information, that i s , auditory- temporal to visual-temporal (AT-VT); and 9)the v i s u a l patterns i n p r i n t which are s p a t i a l l y organized must be integrated with the auditory pat- terns of speech which are temporally ordered when reading. This task can be represented by an intermodal i n t e g r a t i o n of visual-temporal and auditory-temporal information, that i s , visual-temporal to auditory- temporal (VT-AT). These nine tasks then (A-A, VS-VS, A-VS, VS-A, VT-VT, VT-VS, VS-VT, AT-VT, VT-AT) are regarded as being p a r a l l e l to the reading process. These tasks are used i n t h i s study to compare the perceptual mechanisms of r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n to discover whether d i f - ferences e x i s t which may help explain differences i n t h e i r reading per- formance. 5 Research Question The present study w i l l attempt to explore the extent and nature of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and reading achievement, using the c r i t e r i a measures of auditory, v i s u a l , temporal, and s p a t i a l sensory i n t e g r a t i o n . Sensory i n t e g r a t i o n w i l l be assessed by intramodal and crossmodal matching a b i l i t y (modality match- 2 v ing) v i s - a - v i s the modalities of v i s i o n and audition. I t w i l l invest- igate one basic issue as reviewed i n the l i t e r a t u r e : 1) What i s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and modality matching? On which ( i f any) tasks (eg. audi t o r y - v i s u a l , temporal-spatial or a combination thereof) do impulsive c h i l d r e n perform more poorly than t h e i r r e f l e c t i v e counterparts? 2 Modality matching involves the presentation of a stimulus or standard pattern i n one modality, followed by a comparison pattern i n another modality. The subject i s required to judge the equivalence or match of the two patterns. Intramodal re f e r s to the presentation of the standard and the comparison patterns i n the same modality; intermodal r e f e r s to the presentation i n two d i f f e r e n t modalities. 6 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Reflection-Impulsivity Development of the Construct Kagan, Moss, and S i g e l (1963) provided one of the e a r l i e r attempts to operationalize conceptual s t y l e s . They began by administering tests to 71 adults between the ages of 20-29 at the Fels Research I n s t i t u t e . Each subject was asked to select a group of figures that went together from a s e l e c t i o n of 32 items. Their analysis indicated two basic orientations and three basic conceptual s t y l e s . The orientations con- si s t e d of 1)ego-centric and 2)stimulus centered, and the conceptual classes were comprised of: l ) a n a l y t i c - d e s c r i p t i v e , 2 ) r e l a t i o n a l , and 3 ) i n f e r e n t i a l - c a t e g o r i c a l . Ego-ecntric was defined as a method of group- ing where an i n d i v i d u a l uses his personal reactions or h i s personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as a basis f o r organizing the s t i m u l i while observing a series of p i c t u r e s . Examples of ego-centric responses are t y p i f i e d by statements l i k e : "people I l i k e ; people who scare me; people who l i k e me; and people wearing the same type of clothes I am wearing". The stimulus centered i n d i v i d u a l , on the other hand, did not categorize according to personal f e e l i n g s , but instead, based h i s d e c i s i o n upon aspects of the external environment. Examples of h i s responses are: "men, s o l d i e r s , a c t i v e chi l d r e n , happy people,and women with s k i r t s on". The f i r s t of the three conceptual categories i s the. analytic-: d e s c r i p t i v e category. This response s t y l e i s based upon the r e l a t i v e s i m i l a r i t y of the elements within a stimulus complex. That i s , the subject looks at the stimulus i n order to ascertain s i m i l a r i t i e s with one or more of the others i n order to d i f f e r e n t i a t e classes of s t i m u l i . Examples of t h i s are: "people holding something; people with t h e i r l e f t arm up; people with no shoes on; and people holding weapons". The i n f e r e n t i a l - c a t e g o r i c a l concepts are based upon an inference which i s drawn from tr e a t i n g the s t i m u l i or a group. I t must be noted that each stimulus i n a group i s treated as an i n d i v i d u a l instance of a conceptual mode. Examples of t h i s are: "people who help others; pro- f e s s i o n a l men; poor people; s o l d i e r s , and medical people". The r e l a t i o n a l group categorizes the stimulus according to the functional r e l a t i o n s h i p that e x i s t between or among the s t i m u l i . In t h i s case, no stimulus i s an independent instance of the concept, since each stimulus i s dependent upon the others for membership. Examples that i l l u s t r a t e such a concept are: "murder scenes - he shot t h i s man; subject' family; a married couple; people arguing with each other; stages i n the l i f e of a person; and mother cuttin g cake f o r the c h i l d " (Kagan et a l . , 1963, pp.76-77). From the above, Kagan and h i s associates synthesized two basic r e s - ponse s t y l e s , the a n a l y t i c and the non-analytic or r e l a t i o n a l group. The a n a l y t i c group were a c t i v e l y involved i n the conceptual analysis of the stimulus. The sub-elements of a stimulus were analysed and rela t e d to the sub-elements of the other s t i m u l i . For example, i n a de s c r i p t i v e concept, "people with shoes on", the c r u c i a l stimulus i s the presence of shoes while the remaining aspects of the s t i m u l i are disregarded. The a n a l y t i c i d e n t i f i e d the relevant stimulus, while f o r the r e l a t i o n a l group, each element retained i t s i d e n t i t y and was c l a s s i f i e d as a whole. Here, using the i d e n t i c a l stimulus, the r e l a t i o n a l responders would answer, "a family". 8 Based upon a number of studies, Kagan and h i s colleagues concluded that "... r e f l e c t i o n over a l t e r n a t i v e - s o l u t i o n p o s s i b i l i t i e s and v i s u a l analysis are fundamental cognitive d i s p o s i t i o n s that influence both a n a l y t i c concepts on the Conceptual Styles Test and perceptual recognit- ion errors on Design R e c a l l Test and Matching Familiar Figures" (p.37). It appears then that one necessary antecedent f o r an a n a l y t i c response i s a tendency to delay h i s response. Increased response time and systematic analysis of the stimulus array suggest one mode of responding to t h i s type of problem. Continued research into tempo va r i a b l e s has given r i s e to the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y . Subjects described as r e - f l e c t i v e tend to ponder the a l t e r n a t i v e s before responding i n order to eliminate in c o r r e c t answers. The most r e l i a b l e instrument constructed to measure the v a r i a t i o n s i n response s t y l e s or conceptual tempo i s the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) which i s an extension of the Delayed R e c a l l Designs Test (Kagan, et a l . , 1963) with the memory com- ponent eliminated. In t h i s task (MFFT), the subject i s presented with a pi c t u r e of a f a m i l i a r object (eg. tree, cat, d o l l ) and s i x a l t e r n a t i v e s of t h i s object with only one being i d e n t i c a l to the standard (see Appendix A ). The subject i s instructed to select the correct a l t e r n a t i v e . Scoring i s based upon the t o t a l number of errors and the mean response latency to the f i r s t s e l e c t i o n . A maximum of s i x errors i s permitted before the subject i s shown the correct response. Of a l l the measures used to assess r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y , Kagan (1965) found that the MFFT provided the highest degree of response un- cer t a i n t y , and when t h i s measure was correlated with external c r i t e r i a v a r i a b l e s , i t was found to y i e l d the highest c o e f f i c i e n t s (Lee, Kagan & 9 Robson, 1963). There are three forms of the MFFT o r i g i n a l l y developed by Kagan and his associates, these are: Form F - which was the f i r s t to be developed and i s the most widely used; Form S - which i s used p r i m a r i l y for post- test purposes; Form K - t h i s i s the young children's version. Form F and S both have 12 test items and s i x variants for each item, while Form K has 12 items, but only four v a r i a n t s . An adult version of the MFFT has also been constructed. The only d i f f e r e n c e between t h i s and the c h i l d ' s version i s i n the number of v a r i a n t s . The adults' version contains eight v ar ia nts as opposed to s i x . On the basis of early i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , Kagan and h i s colleagues attempted to discern whether a n a l y t i c response s t y l e s were prevalent across a series of other tasks. Correlations between the Conceptual Styles Test (Kagan et a l . , 1963) and an ink b l o t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n task revealed a c o r r e l a t i o n of .39 (p 10), suggesting some degree of generality across ambiguous ink b l o t s and p i c t u r e s . In examining the d e t a i l e d observations made of children's behavior i n the Fels nursery school, i t was noted that behavior patterns were p a r a l l e l to the conceptual s t y l e of the c h i l d . The non-analytic c h i l d r e n were observed to be "... more impulsively aggressive, less l i k e l y to withdraw from a group i n order to work on a task, and more hyperkinetic than a n a l y t i c c h i l d r e n , " (Kagan et a l . , 1963). The a n a l y t i c children, on the other hand, had opposing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . They were observed to have a r e f l e c t i v e d i s p o s i t i o n , a tendency to d i f f e r e n t i a t e experiences, and the a b i l i t y to r e s i s t destracting s t i m u l i . I t was also observed that the average response time on the Conceptual Style Test was s i g n i f i c a n t l y longer for the a n a l y t i c responders (5.4 seconds) than the non-analytic group (4.0 seconds). In sum, Kagan's early work on conceptual s t y l e paved the way for the Matching Familiar Figures Test, an instrument that i s currently used for the operational d e f i n i t i o n of conceptual tempo. R e l i a b i l i t y Due to the lack of standardization of the MFFT, a great deal of confusion has a r i s e n i n regard to the v a l i d i t y of r e s u l t s obtained by d i f f e r e n t experimenters. It appears that one experimenter's r e f l e c t i v e s may be another experimenter's impulsives (Egeland & Weinberg, 1976). In the l a s t few years, the psychometric c r e d i b i l i t y of the MFFT has been the subject of controversy (Ault, M i t c h e l l & Hartmann, 1976; Block, Block & Harrington, 1974; Cairns & Cammock, 1978; H a l l & R u s s e l l , 1974). It i s not unusual, however, for r e l a t i v e l y new instruments to receive such painstaking c r o s s - v a l i d a t i o n checks. Without such micro-analysis, the r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of such instruments would be unclear. The i n i t i a l r e l i a b i l i t y assessment done by Kagan i n 1964 involved a one year t e s t - r e t e s t study which yielded a c o e f f i c i e n t of .65 for latency measures. Studies done by other experimenters using a t e s t - r e t e s t for error scores, over periods ranging from three weeks to two and one- half years, yielded c o e f f i c i e n t s which ranged between .23 and .43 (Ault et a l . , 1976). Internal consistency measures that were synthesized by (Ault, McKinney, Messer, Rupert, and other experimenters) Ault et a l . (1976), show a range of c o e f f i c i e n t for error scores from .32 to .60, with an average c o e f f i c i e n t of .52. Results from these studies, but more s p e c i f i c a l l y from those done by Kagan (Kagan et a l . , 1963; Kagan, 1965a, 1965b, 1966; Kagan & Kogan, 1970), ind i c a t e the following: 11 (a) When in v e s t i g a t i n g a group of 5-11 year olds, a noticeable increase i n response latency occurs with increasing age. The associated negative cor- r e l a t i o n s that e x i s t between latency and error scores range from -.40 to -.65 (p<^_.01). (b) In examining cross-task performances among measures of conceptual tempo, generality was quite high. Error c o r r e l a t i o n s ranged from .33 to .52 and latency cor- r e l a t i o n s ranged from .48 to .82. Since these i n t e r - c o r r e l a t i o n s were r e l a t i v e l y modest, Kagan (1965b) asserts that the MFFT provides the greatest u t i l i t y since, "the MFFT has the greatest response uncertainty and y i e l d s the highest c o r r e l a t i o n s with external c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s " (p. 617). (c) Test-retest r e l i a b i l i t y of the MFFT y i e l d s a r e l a t i v e l y stable and consistent assessment of the r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y dimension. Yando (1968), i n his r e l i a b i l i t y assessment, had h i s second grade subjects perform the test on a weekly basis over a ten- week period. I n i t i a l l y , Yando presented a standard and two variants to each c h i l d and then added one varian t each week u n t i l a t o t a l of twelve was reached. The mean c o r r e l a t i o n was .70 f o r response time and errors on the MFFT. This f i n d i n g i s consistent with those of Kagan, Pearson, and Welch (1966a), who obtained s i m i l a r 12 r e s u l t s (r=.70) for t e s t - r e t e s t a f t e r a ten-week Interval on alternate forms of the MFFT. However, Messer (1968) found that a f t e r a two and one-half year i n t e r v a l , the r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t f o r the MFFT was only .31. This suggests that the s t a b i l i t y of the MFFT i s considerably reduced over long time i n t e r v a l s . I t seems clear then, that the tendency to respond either quickly or slowly on a match-to-sample task involving a high degree of uncertainty, may be generalized across tasks and i t appears to be stable over time. It should be emphasized here that Kagan's i n i t i a l conception of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y was based upon response speed, but was l a t e r mod- i f i e d to include response accuracy. The change resulted from two small but anomalous groups that were either f a s t and accurate or slow and i n - accurate. The f i r s t group, those who had a r e l a t i v e l y f a s t response time with few errors, were considered to be the bright c h i l d r e n . The l a t t e r group, that i s , those who had r e l a t i v e l y slow response times and who committed large numbers of errors were considered to be greatly affected by task anxiety (rather than being d u l l ) . These two groups created a technical problem since i t was no longer true that a consistent negative c o r r e l a t i o n existed between response latency and errors, where f a s t responders made more errors and slow responders made fewer errors. To a l l e v i a t e t h i s problem, a scoring system was devised which used speed and accuracy scores. The impulsives then, were those who scored below the median on response latency and above the median on error scores. The r e f l e c t i v e s on the other hand, were those who scored above the median on response latency and below the median on error scores. Block, Block and Harrington (1974) i n response to the dual c r i t e r i o n method of scoring note that while response time i s the true measure of the R-I dimension and may be r e l a t i v e l y stable, accuracy scores are some- what less r e l i a b l e and may r e f l e c t a host of underlying f a c t o r s , eg. low i n t e l l i g e n c e , anxiety, misunderstanding of the task, poor v i s i o n , etc.. This may introduce sources of variance i n subject s e l e c t i o n d i f f e r e n t and more powerful than what i s measured by response time. In addition, i t would be d i f f i c u l t to ascertain the extent to which differences between r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives are a t t r i b u t a b l e to t h e i r differences i n either response time or accuracy. Since accuracy may be tapping into a d i f f e r e n t set of v a r i a b l e s , the double median s p l i t may not be j u s t i f i e d . Antecedents of the R-I Dimension A number of explanations have been forwarded to account for the f a c t that some ch i l d r e n are slower and more accurate than others i n the per- formance of match-to-sample tasks. One explanation makes reference to a possible antecedent condition underlying the R-I dimension. It suggests that c h i l d r e n i n problem- solving s i t u a t i o n s respond with anxiety to a v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n a l cues (Kagan & Kogan, 1970). Children having minimal anxiety i n such s i t u a t i o n s might be expected to adopt a task strategy which was neither r e f l e c t i v e nor impulsive. R e f l e c t i v e subjects may equate competence with accuracy, and thus they perform slowly. Impulsives on the other hand, view competence i n terms of quickness, thus giving r i s e to t h e i r f a s t performance. • In s i t u a t i o n s , then, where anxiety over competence i s aroused, r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive subjects would be expected to respond i n a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c fashion. Studies by Ward (1968) and R e a l i and H a l l (1970), however, obtained only p a r t i a l evidence i n support of the foregoing hypothesis. In both studies, feedback regarding the q u a l i t y of performance was given. Both studies noted that impulsive subjects did not increase t h e i r speed of responses when given f a i l u r e feedback. However, r e f l e c t i v e subjects did increase t h e i r response latency i n response to f a i l u r e feed- back. A more p l a u s i b l e explanation of factors underlying the R-I dimension again implicates anxiety. Kagan and Kogan (1970) have suggested that there e x i s t s a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between anxiety over error and r e f l e c t - i v i t y . In t h i s view, the performance of the impulsive c h i l d would r e f l e c t his lack of concern over making mistakes. The above hypothesis has found support i n the l i t e r a t u r e dealing with v i s u a l scanning s t r a t e g i e s . A t t e n t i o n a l factors of eye scanning and observation strategies was f i r s t investigated by Kagan (1965b). His i n i t i a l attempt to delineate differences among r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives, led him into the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the eye movements of h i s subjects. Kagan measured the head movements of h i s subjects as a gross measure of eye movement i n order to define the differences i n strategy. A c o r r e l a t i o n of .91 between the number of head-eye f i x a t i o n s and the mean response time was obtained. Siegelmen (1969) and Drake (1970) both attempted a micro analysis of the strategy used by focusing on frequency, duration, and target of observation. Siegelman (1969) used a mechanical version of the MFFT while Drake (1970) employed a Mackworth's eye-marker camera 15 to record eye f i x a t i o n s . Both"authors noted that impulsives ignored two and one-half times as many al t e r n a t i v e s of the MFFT than do r e f l e c t i v e s . The impulsives devoted proportionately more time to looking at the a l t e r n a t i v e observed most and t h e i r f i n a l s e l e c t i o n . They also spent a disproportionate amount of time on one a l t e r n a t i v e and selected that a l t e r n a t i v e without considering any of the others. The r e f l e c t i v e s on the other hand, used a strategy of d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g a l l the a l t e r n a t i v e s into component parts and comparing them to the standard i n order to select the appropriate a l t e r n a t i v e . In constrast, the impulsives employed a strategy of global comparisons between the a l t e r n a t i v e and the standard. In view of t h i s , one might speculate that the r i s k i e r strategy of the impulsive subjects i s based upon an underlying lack of concern over possible e r r r o r s . R e f l e c t i v e subjects on the other hand, use a more cautious strategy and take longer, thereby avoiding errors. Research on scanning strategies has also provided methods of improving the impulsive's performance. The attempts to modify the impulsive's response s t y l e t y p i c a l l y have the subject: (a) delay response time, (b) imitate r e f l e c t i v e models, or (c) develop e f f i c i e n t search strategies and scanning techniques. Studies which have employed the f i r s t method (Briggs & Weinberg, 1973; Kagan, Pearson & Welch, 1966) have not met with as much success as those employing the l a t t e r two. In employing the second method (Debus, 1970; Denny, 1972) , the subjects showed a decrease i n errors, but not response time. A study by Meichenbaum and Goodman ( 1971) , however, employed modelling along with s e l f - v e r b a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g 3 techniques and found that t h e i r subjects showed a decrease i n errors and an increase i n response latency. Studies employing the t h i r d method (McLauchlan, 1976; Siegel, 1973; Zelinker, J e f f r e y , Ault & Parsons, 1972) noted that the task performance of impulsive subjects r e a d i l y improved. In view of t h i s , one might i n f e r that perceptual organization rather than c e n t r a l processing d e f i c i e n c i e s can account f o r the poorer per- formance of impulsive subjects. In t h i s regard, i t would be of i n t e r e s t to investigate s i m i l a r features of perceptual organization i n such other modalities as audition. Correlates of Reflection-Impulsivity Thus f a r , the discussion has considered anxiety as a possible antecedent of the R-I dimension. I t has also provided grounds to show that the operational d e f i n i t i o n of R-I has a c e r t a i n degree of convergent r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y , although d i f f e r e n t i a l findings have been noted disputing t h i s . The next section further explores the construct and the nature of the R-I dimension to other aspects of human performance. Reflection-Impulsivity and I n t e l l i g e n c e The contention that the MFFT i s a measure of i n t e l l i g e n c e has been 3 S e l f - v e r b a l i z a t i o n i s a cognitive t r a i n i n g technique used to improve task performance. The procedure i s as follows: f i r s t , the experimenter (model) performs a task t a l k i n g aloud while the subject observes; then the subject performs the same task while the experimenter i n s t r u c t s aloud; then the subject performs the same task while i n s t r u c t i n g himself aloud, then whispering to himself, and f i n a l l y , doing the task covertly. 17 discussed by Block, Block and Harrington (1974) and Mischel (1969). Mischel's p o s i t i o n may be summed up i n t h i s way: "To the extent that conceptual tempo involves reaction time, and f a s t r eaction time i s a determinant of generalized performance I.Q., one would have to be a l e r t to t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s " (Mischel, 1969, p.1013). Campbell and Fiske (1959) suggest that any new instrument that i s devised and purports construct v a l i d i t y be subjugated to convergent and discriminant v a l i d i t y analysis to d i s p e l any accusations that may be lodged against i t . In a study by H a l l and Russell (1974), the above suggestion was employed i n a multitrait-multimethod analysis of the MFFT. In t h i s study four i n s t r u - ments were used, these were: the MFFT and the Word Recognition Test (WRT); which were used to e s t a b l i s h convergent v a l i d i t y as a measure of conceptual tempo. The Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices (RCPM) and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) were used to e s t a b l i s h discriminant v a l i d i t y ( i e . to measure i n t e l l i g n e c e ) . Convergent and d i s - criminant v a l i d i t y was assessed by using three c r i t e r i a . These were: errors, correct responses, and latency scores for the four t e s t s . The two I.Q. tests (RCPM and PPVT) both achieved convergent v a l i d i t y on a l l three c r i t e r i o n measures. The conceptual tempo group (MFFT and WRT) only achieved convergent v a l i d i t y on the latency measure. The MFFT and WRT only maintained discriminant v a l i d i t y against the PPVT on error and correct scores. The high latency c o e f f i c i e n t s f or a l l of the above instruments ranged from .4 to .6 and were s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with one another. M o l l i c and Messer (1978) explained t h i s high latency c o r r e l a t i o n s by suggesting the influence of a s i g n i f i c a n t age e f f e c t (o^=4.61, p<.05). This resulted i n a higher p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n f or younger ch i l d r e n than older ones. M o l l i c k and Messer (1978) did not specify the exact ages to which the above findings were applicable, although the 23 studies reviewed by Messer (1976) showed a median MFFT response time-I.Q. cor- r e l a t i o n of .165. D i f f e r e n t i a l findings, however, have also been noted. Eska and Black (1971) and Lewis, Rausch, Godlberg, and Dodd (1968) f o r example, both obtained s i g n i f i c a n t response time-I.Q. c o r r e l a t i o n s of .45. S i m i l a r l y , negative c o r r e l a t i o n s averaging i n the mid .40's have also been attained between MFFT errors and I.Q. When a comparison was made between 100 r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive subjects on the WISC-R, Brannigan and Ash (1977) noted that r e f l e c t i v e s performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better. The r e f l e c t i v e s dimonstrated s u p e r i o r i t y on the following subtests: Information, Comprehension, D i g i t Span, Picture Completion, Picture Arrangements, Block Design, and Object Assembly, while no s i g n i f i c a n t differences were noted on the S i m i l a r i t y , Vocabulary, and Coding subtests. In addition, Plomin and Buss (1973) suggest that the experimental design be given c a r e f u l consideration, since there i s a s i g n i f i c a n t order e f f e c t i n the administration of the MFFT and I.Q. Their study consisted of s p l i t t i n g 52 second graders into two groups, the f i r s t group receiving the MFFT f i r s t , followed by the WISC, and the second group receiving the reverse order. They noted a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e on the response time f o r the MFFT. The subjects receiving the MFFT f i r s t , answered more impulsively than those who took the MFFT as t h e i r second treatment. This indicated that the WISC caused subjects to respond more r e f l e c t i v e l y , and the authors suggest that the MFFT therefore be administered f i r s t . They also noted that for the group receiving the WISC f i r s t , there was a very low and i n s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between WISC Verbal, Performance, and 19 F u l l Scale I.Q. scores. This, however, was not true of the group per- forming the MFFT f i r s t . R eflection-Impulsivity and Anxiety The l i t e r a t u r e i n t h i s area i s both scanty and inconsistent. Confusion has resulted from differences i n design and instrumentation used, such as differences i n age of subjects, i n t e l l e c t i v e a b i l i t y , anxiety of tasks, order of presentation and the o p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y . Kagan's i n i t i a l explanation of the impulsive's rapid response s t y l e i s based upon h i s avoidance-of-anxiety hypothesis (Kagan, 1963). Here, the implusive i s seen as responding quickly in;order to avoid .expected f a i l u r e . Kagan (1966) l a t e r asserted that when f a i l u r e and anxiety are both included i n a performance task, i t w i l l lead 'to more r e f l e c t i v e responding by the impulsive c h i l d . This l a t e r a s s e r tion was p a r t i a l l y confirmed by Messer (1970), R e a l i and H a l l (1970), Ward (1968), and Weiner and Adams (1974). They noted that when subjects received feedback on errors, both r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives increased t h e i r response latencies on MFFT items and on an anagram te s t . Messer (1970) and Weiner et a l . (1974) noted that impulsives had the greater :;decline on MFFT errors, following f a i l u r e , than did r e f l e c t i v e s . Ward (1968) also noted that on a ret e s t of the MFFT, a f t e r a f a i l u r e experience, the f a s t / i n - accurate group had a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n errors when compared to the slow/accurate group. Ward's (1968) fast/inaccurates, however, had s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r response times than the fast/accurates and slow/ accurates. This appears to be a d i r e c t c o ntradiction of Nuessle's (1972) find i n g s . Nuessle noted while studying the focusing behavior of r e f l e c t i v e s , that longer la t e n c i e s were associated with more e f f e c t i v e problem solving. From t h i s , Ward (1968) suggests that the fast/inaccurates were more s e n s i t i v e to evaluation cues to achieve a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n errors than were the f a s t or slow/accurates. On the bases of h i s f i n d - ings, Ward r e j e c t s Kagan's (1963) avoidance-of-anxiety hypothesis. A study by R e a l i and H a l l (1970) investigated the e f f e c t s of anxiety when feedback on performance was given. Their r e s u l t s indicated the following: (a) the performance of r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive subjects was not d i f f e r e n t i a l l y affected by feedback about successful performance. This held true for both the response time and error v a r i a b l e s ; (b) the e f f e c t s of f a i l u r e did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive subjects i n either response or i n expectancy of f a i l u r e ; (c) there appeared to be no r e l a t i o n s h i p between decision time and expectancy of success. The studies of Ward (1968) and R e a l i and H a l l (1970) seem to cast doubt upon Kagan's avoidance-of-anxiety hypothesis. However, flaws i n Ward's research design leave some open questions; the subjects for example, were 87 kindergarten ch i l d r e n . Kagan (1966) has cautioned against the use of subjects below the age of f i v e or s i x years old, since there appears to be no c o r r e l a t i o n between response time and errors for t h i s age group. Kagan further suggests that a long response time for these subjects does not i n d i c a t e r e f l e c t i v e n e s s over the task, but idleness. These subjects also appear to become d i s t r a c t e d by the experimenter and h i s instruments, thereby further confounding the r e s u l t s . 21 Another area that has been overlooked i n most of the studies, i s the e f f e c t of anxiety on I.Q. Research has indicated that when consid- ering the e f f e c t s of anxiety on task performance both the I.Q. of the subjects and the nature of the task must be considered. For example: (a) high anxiety f a c i l i t a t e s the performance of high I.Q. subjects on tasks ranging i n d i f f i c u l t y from simple to moderate; (b) on very d i f f i c u l t tasks, low anxiety subjects are superior i n performance to high anxiety subjects when they are of comparable a b i l i t y (Gaudry & Spielberg, 1971). It seems evident then, that I.Q. can be considered a major v a r i a b l e i n anxiety research and thus cannot be ignored when considering the re- l a t i o n of anxiety to the R-I dimension. Summary From the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed thus f a r , we have noted d i f f e r e n t i a l findings when the variables of i n t e l l i g e n c e , anxiety, and scanning were considered. D i f f e r e n t i a l findings f o r the i n t e l l i g e n c e v a r i a b l e may be due, i n part, to the order i n which tasks are presented to subjects. Plomin and Buss (1973) have demonstrated that subjects responded more r e f l e c t - i v e l y when the I.Q. measure was adiministered f i r s t than when i t was administered second. It i s suggested therefore, that the MFFT be admin- is t e r e d f i r s t i n order to avoid erroneous c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of subjects into r e f l e c t i v e s or impulsives. Order e f f e c t s then, need to be considered i n future R-I/I.Q. research. Measurements of the e f f e c t s of anxiety on performance tasks have shown that both r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives increase t h e i r response latency when they received feedback on errors (Messer, 1970; R e a l i & H a l l , 1970; Ward, 1968; Weiner & Adams, 1974), but i t was the impulsives who had the greater decline on MFFT errors (Messer, 1970; Weiner & Adams, 1974). R e a l i and H a l l (1970) and Ward (1968) contend, however, that a decrease i n MFFT errors does not nec e s s a r i l y imply a modification of t h e i r tempo, since the impulsives had a f a s t e r response time than the r e f l e c t i v e s . However, a close r examination of t h e i r experimental design, shows an inappropriate s e l e c t i o n of subjects(Ward, 1968), and an inappropriate instrument to assess r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y (Reali & H a l l , 1970). The inconsistent findings i n t h i s area have been further complicated by researchers' neglecting to consider the I.Q. . v a r i a b l e i n anxiety research (Gaudry & Spielberger, 1971). Research on scanning has p r i m a r i l y been concerned with a t t e n t i o n a l factors of eye movement and observation s t r a t e g i e s . Kagan's (1965b) i n v e s t i g a t i o n into a t t e n t i o n a l factors resulted i n a c o r r e l a t i o n of .91 between head-eye f i x a t i o n s and the mean response time. Drake (1970) and Siegelman (1969) noted that impulsives ignored two and one-half times as many a l t e r n a t i v e s than r e f l e c t i v e s . Research on scanning strategies has also noted that impulsives perform at par with t h e i r r e f l e c t i v e counterparts when a search strategy has been taught (Kilburg & Siegel, 1973; Seigel, Keiasic & Kilburg, 1973). This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y relevant since i t suggest d i f f i c i e n c i e s i n perceptual organization rather than cognitive processing. The inconsistent findings discussed i n t h i s l i t e r a t u r e review can be a t t r i b u t e d to a v a r i e t y of f a c t o r s . Perhaps the most important factor i s the questionable v a l i d i t y of the R-I construct, while l e s s e r factors include s e l e c t i o n of subjects, instruments, experimental design, and analysis. In sum, r e s u l t s from the R-I research need to be i n t e r - preted cautiously. The R-I l i t e r a t u r e reviewed i n t h i s section i s r e l a t e d to the r e - search question i n the following manner: 1) the l i t e r a t u r e on scanning strategies has formed the basis of our research question. Since impulsive c h i l d r e n were i n e f f i c i e n t i n scan- ning and decoding of graphic symbols (Kilburg & Siegel, 1973; Nelson, 1969; Siegel et a l . , 1973; Sigelman, 1969), i t was hypothesized that i n e f f i c i e n c i e s i n scanning of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i may be a f a c t o r contributing to reading d e f i c i e n c i e s i n impulsive c h i l d r e n (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1972; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Readence, 1976; Shapiro, 1976). 2) the l i t e r a t u r e on i n t e l l i g e n c e indicates that r e f l e c t i v e s perform s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than impulsives on an i n t e l l i g e n c e measure (eg. WISC-R) (Brannigan & Ash, 1977). This suggest that we need to control for the e f f e c t s that i n t e l l i g e n c e might have on AVI task performance. By c o n t r o l l i n g for the i n t e l l i g e n c e v a r i a b l e , we may be expected to get a l e s s biased assessment of the perceptual organization mechanisms of impulsive ch i l d r e n . 3) the l i t e r a t u r e on anxiety indicates thatone antecedent condition underlying the impulsives' response s t y l e i s the factor of anxiety (Kagan, 1963). Althought the factor of anxiety w i l l not be considered i n t h i s study ( i n assessing the perceptual organization mechanisms of impulsive c h i l d r e n ) , i t i s presented i n t h i s section to give the reader a broader perspective of the probable constituents of the R-I d i - mension. Crossmodal Processing A D e f i n i t i o n Crossmodal processing r e f e r s to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s capacity to assimilate, integrate, and organize multimodal information as r e - lated to academic performance (Derevensky, 1977). Topics that are usually categorized under the r u b r i c of crossmodal processing are: intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n , intersensory transfer, and modality matching^. The two basic models which have been proposed for exploring crossmodal processing are modal s p e c i f i c and nonmodal (Jones & Connolly, 1970; Pick, 1970). The modal s p e c i f i c model views each modality as an independent e n t i t y , with i t s d i s t i n c t patterns of transduction and i t s s p e c i f i c s i t e s of neural transmission and processing. V i s i o n i s a good example of t h i s , although i t has often been treated as comprising the e n t i r e perceptual f i e l d . In the nonmodal model, each modality loses i t s s p e c i f i c q u a l i t i e s and becomes pooled into a single perceptual modality, which now acts as Intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n involves the a s s i m i l a t i o n and i n t e - gration of multimodal information. The method used to assess intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n i s modality matching (see footnote 2). Intersensory t r a n s f e r as d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from intersensory integration, involves the t r a n s l a t i o n of a learned p r i n c i p l e from one modality to another modality on concurrent or subsequent tasks. A d d i t i o n a l l y , intersensory transfer (unlike intersensory integration) does not assume that the translated information to the other modality i s equivalent. the instrument of perceptual processing. Both the modal s p e c i f i c and nonmodal models have not received much support from the l i t e r a t u r e which deals with crossmodal processing (see Friedes, 1974), An alternate hypothesis to the modal s p e c i f i c and nonmodal models i s the intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n hypothesis (Friedes, 1974). Here, information received i n one sense modality i s a v a i l a b l e v i a t r a n s l a t i o n to another modality. Reading, for example, i s a task r e q u i r i n g t r a n s l a t i o n from a v i s u a l to an auditory code and v i c e versa. Reading impairment was viewed as a f a i l u r e to integrate v i s u a l and aural s t i m u l i . This notion has found support i n the l i t e r a t u r e dealing with intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n and reading (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Kahn & Birch, 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). Since the research question posed i n t h i s thesis deals only with intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n of aural and v i s u a l s t i m u l i , intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n of t a c t i l e , haptic or other sense modalities along with intersensory transfer w i l l not be dealt with here. Developmental Trends of Intersensory Integration Auditory-Visual Integration and Reading Birch and Belmont (1964) were the f i r s t to propose that auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n was e s s e n t i a l to the reading pro- cess. The procedure used by Birch and Belmont (1964) to study i n t e g r a t i v e a b i l i t y was a match-to-sample method. Here, the experimenter struck a serie s of taps with a p e n c i l or pen according to a planned sequence, such as; .., . , • The c h i l d ' s task was to l i s t e n to the taps and then pick the appropriate sequence from a serie s of three that were presented v i s u a l l y (see Figure 1). The r e s u l t s of studies that have investigated audio-visual i n t e g r a t i o n (AVI) and reading can be summarized as follows: (1) Better readers performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than poorer readers on the AVI task (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Kahn & Birch , 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). This r e l a t i o n - ship existed from K to grade 6. (2) The r e l a t i o n s h i p between AVI and i n t e l l i g e n c e i s ambiguous. Birch and Belmont (1964) noted that c h i l d r e n with a low AVI score also had lower mean I.Q., regardless of t h e i r reading a b i l i t y . S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966) obtained a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n of .53 for AVI and I.Q.; Rae (1977) noted a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n - ship between AVI with nonverbal I.Q. and read- ing achievement of .68 and .56 re s p e c t i v e l y . However, studies by Ford (1967), Jorgensen and Hyde (1974), and Kahn and Birch (1967) found no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between AVI a b i l i t y and I.Q. I t must be noted, however, that the same I.Q. measure was not used for the above studies. This could explain differences i n find i n g s . 27 AUDITORY TAP PATTERNS VISUAL STIMULI EXAMPLES A . . • • • • • • • B t . t C • • • • a • a a • • • • • • • • • • • • • TEST ITEMS 1 .. .. • • « t • a a a • a • a 2 • • • • a • • a • • • • • a a • 3 *"* • • • • • • • a a • a k . . . . • t • • • • • • a • • • • 3 • • • • • • 6 7 3 • • • t 9 • • • • • • • • • • a a a mm a • a a a • • • • t • • • • • • • • • • • a t • • • a t * • • • i • a a a a a a a a a 10 • • • • a a • • • • • • • • • • • • Figure 1. A u d i t o r y and v i s u a l t e s t s t i m u l i . Large and sm a l l spaces represent approximate time i n t e r v a l s of 1 sec. and 0.5 s e c , r e s p e c t i v e l y . Correct choices were not underlined on the t e s t forms. 28 R e l i a b i l i t y Kahn and Birch (1967), using a modified extension of the Birch and Belmont (1964) procedure, when 20 items were employed as opposed to the o r i g i n a l 10, obtained a t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y a f t e r 10 days of .76 and .90 for t h i r d and f i f t h grade boys res p e c t i v e l y . Becker and Sabatino (1971) obtained t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s ranging from .34 to .92 for ages 5 through 8. Rae (1977) obtained a c o e f f i c i e n t of .82, using the Kuder- Richardson formula 20, for ages 9 and 10. Although the r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s of .8 or above meet psychometric a c c e p t a b i l i t y (Magnusson, 1967), the inconsistency of the findings give cause for concern. As with other discrepant findings (e.g. between AVI and reading), one must examine the experimental designs. weaknesses that have been noted i n methodological design and instrumentation are as follows: (a) d i f f e r e n t versions of the Birch and Belmont test have been used, some administered i n d i v i d - a l l y , others i n groups (Rae, 1977; R e i l l y , 1971; Rudnick, S t e r r i t t & Flax, 1967); (b) low c e i l i n g e f f e c t r e s u l t i n g from too few and and too easy items (Birch & Belmont, 1965; Klapper & Birc h , 1971); (c) low r e l i a b i l i t y with the small number of items used (6 to 10 items) (Beery, 1967; Birch & Belmont, 1965; Rudnick et a l . , 1964; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1967). I t can be seen, therefore, that t h i s lack of rigorous empiricism i s p a r t i a l l y due to non-standardized instrumentation and haphazard methodological procedures. Future researchers need to i s o l a t e the variables of i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and maintain consistency i n t h e i r methods of examination. Auditory-Visual Temporal-Spatial Integration The o r i g i n a l Birch and Belmont (1964) procedure has come under a great deal of scrutiny and has been challenged on the grounds that no consideration was given to the subject's intramodal a b i l i t y . For example, i s poor performance on an AVI task due to an impairment i n i n t e g r a t i v e a b i l i t i e s or to an i n a b i l i t y to discriminate the relevant stimulus i n e i t h e r of the modalities concerned? S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966) f i r s t made t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n and also commented that the AVI task may be nothing more than a test of temporal-spatial i n t e g r a t i o n . Thus, i t may have no relevance to the modalities of audition or v i s i o n . In using these nine combinations, Rudnick et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t t et a l . (1971) noted the v i s u a l s p a t i a l matching (VS-VS) to be the l e a s t d i f f i c u l t , the combined v i s u a l s p a t i a l and temporal matchings (VS-A, A-VS, VS-VT, VT-VS) to be moderately d i f f i c u l t , and the purely temporal matchings (AT-VT, VT-AT,VT-VT, A-A) to be the most d i f f i c u l t . These findings i n d i c a t e the contention of the above authors that differences on the AVI were due to the temporal- s p a t i a l dimension rather than to the modalities of v i s i o n and audition. Further support of the above was noted by Goodnow (1971), Jarman (1977b), Klapper and B i r c h (1971), and Muehl and Kremenak (1966). R-I And Crossmodal Processing R-I and Reading I t has been suggested that impulsive children as operationalized by the MFFT have d e f i c i t s i n reading when compared to t h e i r r e f l e c t i v e counterparts (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1971; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Kagan, 1965b; Margolis, 1976; Readence, 1977; Shapiro, 1976; Stennet & Smythe, 1972). In Kagan's (1965b) study, a card with f i v e words was shown to the c h i l d , and h i s task was to point to the one word that was read out by the examiner. Even when verbal a b i l i t y was held constant, r e s u l t s c l e a r l y showed that implusive children" had more reading recognition errors. Shapiro (1976) administered the Gates-MacGinitie Readiness S k i l l s Test along with the MFFT to h i s 67 f i r s t grade subjects, and noted that with chronological age and i n t e l l i g e n c e held constant, the r e f l e c t i v e s performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better on s i x of the eight subtests. Davey (1971) used 38 fourth grade boys and divided them into an a n a l y t i c and non-analytic response s t y l e which Kagan et a l . (1964) found to be c l o s e l y associated with the R-I dimension. Davey's r e s u l t s indicated that the non-analytic under- achievers were more unsuccessful and i n e f f i c i e n t i n t h e i r cue s e l e c t i o n and hypothesis t e s t i n g s t r a t e g i e s . Butler's (1972) study involved 30 second grade boys. Their r e s u l t s were r e l a t i v e l y s i m i l a r , with the r e f l e c t i v e s c orrecting a greater number of t h e i r miscues than the impulsives. Hood and Kendall (1974) and Readence (1977) noted r e s u l t s s i m i l a r to the above. Readence's multivariate analysis indicated that differences for the two response s t y l e s were due to 31 t h e i r use of graphic and sound cues. The above findings i n d i c a t e a consistent pattern of poorer performance i n reading by the impulsive responders. As suggested e a r l i e r , a possible avenue for further i n v e s t i g a t i o n would be to examine impulsives' perceptual organizational a b i l i t i e s . R-I And Auditory-Visual Integration Studies i n v e s t i g a t i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and AVI are very sparse. One such study was by Margolis (1976). He attempted to ascertain the r e l a t i o n s h i p between AVI, reading readiness, and conceptual tempo, using a sample of 82 middleclass kindergarten ch i l d r e n . By employing a modified version of the Birch and Belmont (1964) procedure, the Metrop.olitian Total Readiness, the Weschler Preschool and Primary Scale of I n t e l l i g e n c e (WPPSI), and the MFFT, he noted the following r e s u l t s : (a) no s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t ; (b) impulsives performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y more poorly on the AVI (p<_.01) and readiness (p 05); (c) the impulsives were s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r i n response time than the r e f l e c t i v e s on the MFFT and were s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r i n response time than the r e f l e c t i v e s on AVI ( p ^ . 0 1 ) ; and (d) no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between tempo groups and WPPSI verbal I.Q. or sex (p<L.05). Although the Margolis (1976) study was one of the f i r s t ' to incorporate the v a r i a b l e of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y i n assessing AVI a b i l i t y , the r e s u l t s were confounded because the sample used was inappropriate. Kagan et a l . (1964) has cautioned against the use of subjects below the age of f i v e or s i x years old, since there appears to be no c o r r e l a t i o n between response time and errors for t h i s age group. The r e s u l t s were further confounded by using the Birch and Belmont procedure (Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). Summary Studies that have employed the Birch and Belmont (1964) procedure as a means of i n v e s t i g a t i n g AVI a b i l i t i e s , have noted that d e f i c i e n c i e s i n i n t e g r a t i v e a b i l i t y have been associated with poor reading (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Kahn & Birch, 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). The r e l a t i o n s h i p between AVI and i n t e l l i g e n c e i s ambiguous, possibly because the same I.Q. measure was not used i n a l l the studies. However, Birch and Belmont (1964), Rae (1977), and S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966) noted a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between these two v a r i a b l e s , while Ford (1967), Jorgensen and Hyde (1974), and Kahn and B i r c h (1968) did not. The Birch and Belmont (1964) procedure, however, has been c r i t i c i z e d on the grounds of i t s i n a b i l i t y to assess intramodal impairment. S t e r r i t t and Rudnick (1966) argued that the c h i l d may not be d e f i c i e n t i n h i s a b i l i t y to integrate s t i m u l i , but may be unable to discern the relevant stimulus i n a performance task due to a d e f i c i e n t modality. They further suggest that an AVI task may be nothing more than a test of temporal-spatial i n t e g r a t i o n . In l i g h t of t h i s , tasks inv o l v i n g nine combinations of a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l and temporal-spatial were employed. By employing these combinations, i t could be ascertained whether d e f i c i e n c i e s i n reading impairment were due to an i n t r a or intermodal i n t e g r a t i o n of auditory-temporal, visual-temporal or v i s u a l - s p a t i a l information. Studies by Rudnick et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t t et a l . (1971), noted that the v i s u a l s p a t i a l matching was the easiest, the combined v i s u a l and temporal matchings to be of moderate d i f f i c u l t y , and the purely temporal matchings to be the most d i f f i c u l t . By noting the d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s of the 9 AVI tasks, one may i n f e r the types of s k i l l s ( i . e . auditory-temporal, visual-temporal or v i s u a l - s p a t i a l i n t e g r a t i o n tasks) which contribute to reading d i f f i c u l t i e s f o r impulsive ch i l d r e n . Since the purely temporal matching tasks (AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VT, A-A) were noted to have the highest d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l , one may speculate that such tasks may be the source of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s for impulsive c h i l d r e n . Some studies i n v e s t i g a t i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the dimension of R-I and reading, noted that impulsive c h i l d r e n were d e f i c i e n t i n reading performance when compared to t h e i r r e f l e c t i v e counterparts (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1971; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Kagan, 1965b; Margolis, 1976; Readence, 1976; Shapiro, 1976). When the re l a t i o n s h i p between the dimension of R-I and AVI was assessed, Margolis (1976) noted that impulsive c h i l d r e n performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y poorer i n in t e g r a t i n g aural and v i s u a l s t i m u l i . It should be noted, however, that Margolis's r e s u l t s may have been confounded by the sample group and the AVI instrument used (see Kagan et a l . , 1964; Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). The l i t e r a t u r e on intersensory i n t e g r a t i o n indicates that poor performance on AVI tasks i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated with reading impairment (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Kahn & Bir c h , 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). A task analysis on the 9 AVI tasks (see pp. 3-4 i n text) indicates that adequate performances on auditory- v i s u a l temporal-spatial tasks appear to resemble those s k i l l s required i n reading (Birch & Belmont, 1964; Beery, 1967; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971; Strang, 1968). By employing these 9 AVI tasks then, we may be able to dilenate the perceptual mechanisms of impulsive c h i l d r e n i n order to account for t h e i r reading d e f i c i e n c i e s . 35 CHAPTER III METHOD Subj ects The subjects were 100 boys and g i r l s (males=51, females=49) i n grade 4 from the Delta school system. They ranged i n age from 8.6 to 10.9 years (X=9.414, SD=.514). These subjects were taken from a larger group (144 subjects) that comprised the sample for the Marshall (1979) study.^ These 100 subjects were selected on the basis of t h e i r a v a i l a b i l i t y . The subjects from the Marshall group -were selected from a population of approximately 550. Students having emotional or uncorrected v i s u a l or auditory d e f i c i t s were not considered. The f i n a l s e l e c t i o n of 144 subjects from the Marshall group was based on t h e i r reading a b i l i t y . The Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test and the Canadian Lorg-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Test (CLT) were used as s e l e c t i o n instruments. One group of 72 boys and one group of 72 g i r l s were selected to represent able and disabled readers. Able readers were considered to be reading at grade l e v e l or one year above according to the scores on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. Disabled readers were considered to be those who were reading one year or more below grade l e v e l according to scores on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. Of the 72 boys, 36 were c l a s s i f i e d as abe readers and 36 as disabled readers. The 72 g i r l s were "5" The 100 subjects used i n t h i s study were a subset of a larger group (144) used i n the Marshall (1979) study. Marshall c o l l e c t e d data on these subjects from the following instruments: Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test ( l e v e l C, form 2), Canadian Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Test (nonverbal battery), and the 9 AVI tasks. Since the experimental design of t h i s study necessitates a measure of reading a b i l i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e i n a d d i t i o n to the MFFT and AVI tasks, i t was decided to use the data made a v a i l a b l e by Marshall. For a complete d e s c r i p t i o n of subject s e l e c t i o n , instrument admin- i s t r a t i o n and construction of the AVI tasks, the reader i s r e f e r r e d to the Marshall study. A b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n , however, w i l l be given here. separated likewise. Scores from the CLT were used to match students on i n t e l l i g e n c e . The r a t i o n a l e for using a reading and I.Q. measure ( i n t h i s study), i s to control for the e f f e c t s that reading a b i l i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e may have on i n t e g r a t i o n of AVI task performance. The l i t e r a t u r e suggests that better readers perform s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than poorer readers on AVI tasks (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Kahn & Birch, 1967; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). While the r e l a t i o n s h i p between AVI and i n t e l - ligence i s ambiguous, some researchers have noted that c h i l d r e n with low AVI scores also had lower mean I.Q. (Birch & Belmont, 1965; Rae, 1977; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966) while other researchers did not (Ford, 1967; Jorgensen & Hyde, 1979; Kahn & Birch, 1967). From the c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s i t would be expedient to control for the possible e f f e c t s that the I.Q. v a r i a b l e has on AVI performance. A d d i t i o n a l l y , gender and chronological age also appear to be v a r i a b l e s e f f e c t i n g AVI performance. Studies by R e i l l y (1971,1972) and Jorgensen and Hyde (1974) noted that g i r l s per- formed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than boys on AVI tasks, and studies by Abravanel (1968) and Birch and Belmont (1965) noted that AVI performance increases with age. From the discussion above, i t seems necessary to control (by match- ing subjects on the above variables) or to s t a t i s t i c a l l y p a r t i a l but the e f f e c t s that reading a b i l i t y , i n t e l l i g e n c e , sex, and chronological age might have on AVI performance. In t h i s way, a l e s s biased assessment can be made of AVI performance of r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n . The f i n a l sample i n t h i s study included 93 subjects of whom 45 were g i r l s and 48 were boys. Seven subjects whose scores placed them at the median of the double median s p l i t , were discarded. Of the 93 subjects i n t h i s sample, 41 were c l a s s i f i e d as disabled readers (21 boys and 20 g i r l s ) and 52 as abled readers (27 boys and 25 g i r l s ) . Further d e s c r i p t i v e and performance s t a t i s t i c s of the sample are presented i n Tables 1 and 2. Instruments Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test - Level C, Form 2 This instrument measures reading achievement. The test i s divided into three subtest: A)Speed and Accuracy, B)Vocabulary, and C)Compre- hension. The Speed and Accuracy subtest contains 36 short paragraphs of r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y . Each paragraph ends i n a question or incomplete statement and i s followed by four words,of which one i s to be selected. C r i t e r i o n i s based upon number attempted minus number correct. The Vocabulary subtest contains 50 items. A stimulus word i s pre- sented along with f i v e a l t e r n a t e s . The subject i s to s e l e c t the word that i s s i m i l a r i n meaning to the stimulus. The Comprehension subtest contains 21 passages with 52 questions. Each question i s presented i n a modified cloze technique, with f i v e alternates to chose from. For a review of the psychometric c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , the reader i s referred to Buros (1972, pp.1080-1083). 6 In performing a double median s p l i t , median scores form MFFT response error and response latency are used as the point of o r i g i n from which a hor i z o n t a l and a v e r t i c a l axis are constructed. This leads to the format- ion of four quadrants. Students whose score f a l l s on the v e r t i c a l or ho r i z o n t a l axis are discarded since they cannot be categorized as: f a s t / accurates, impulsives, slow/inaccurates or r e f l e c t i v e s . Table 1 Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s f o r the C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Performance Measures of the Sample Boys a G i r l s b X SD Range X SD Range Age (nos) 104.34 4.05 26.3 104.06 3.70 13.10 Non-Verbal I.Q. 93.40 10.03 46.0 94.51 8.17 36.0 Reading (raw scores) Vocabulary 40.13 7.17 24.0 37.71 9.76 32.0 Comprehension 34.85 10.20 36.0 34.36 9.48 37.0 Tota l Reading 74.98 16.53 57.0 72.04 18.72 67.0 a n=48 n=45 Table_ 2 Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s for the Ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Performance Measures for the Four Conceptual Tempo Groups a b c d Impulsives Fast Accurates Slow Inaccurates Ref l e c t i v e s X SD Range X SD Range X SD Range X SD Range Age (mos) 103.96 4.80 26.3 105.27 2.75 9.14 103.42 3.52 10.80 104.31 3.36 13.10 Non-Verbal I.Q. 93.85 9.57 46.0 93.29 6.77 21.0 92.69 9.81 37.0 94.79 9.61 40.0 Reading (raw scores) Vocabulary 34.64 10.13 32.0 40.36 7.12 21.0 41.62 6.33 23.0 41.63 6.49 25.0 Comprehension 28.97 10.88 37.0 36.64 8.01 27.0 37.15 6.95 19.0 38.39 7.88 32.0 Total Reading 63.61 19.87 69.0 77.0 14.46 44.0 78.77 12.96 40.0 80.0 13.62 52.0 a n=33 b i / n=14 C n=13 d n=33 40 Canadian Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Test (CLT) - Nonverbal Battery The CLT are a series of tests designed to assess i n t e l l i g e n c e , and ^^comprised of a Verbal and Nonverbal Battery. Only the Nonverbal Bat- tery was administered i n t h i s study. I t i s comprised of three subtests: A ) p i c t o r i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , B ) p i c t o r i a l analogy, and C)numerical r e l - ationships. This battery y i e l d s an estimate of sc h o l a s t i c aptitude. For a review of i t ' s psychometric c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , r e f e r to Buros (1972, p.637). Auditory-Visual Integration Test This task involves 9 combinations of au d i t o r y - v i s u a l and temporal- s p a t i a l patterns: VS-VS VT-VT A-A VS-VT VT-VS A-VS VS-A VT-AT AT-VT This test was constructed by Marshall (1979) according to the s p e c i f i c a t - ions set out by Jarman (1977a). The test contains 30 test items and 5 pra c t i c e items f o r each task (see Appendix D). Each of the 30 test items f o r every one of the 9 tasks was scored for correct choices, with no co r r e c t i o n f o r guessing. During the 5 pra c t i c e t r i a l s , the subjects were informed about the correctness of t h e i r choice. The r e l i a b i l i t y of the 9 AVI tasks using i n t e r n a l consistency was .875 (Marshall, Note 1). When each task was taken separately, the r e l i a b i l i t y ranged from .56 to .82, with mean r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t of .68. These r e l i a b i l i t y data were derived from a sample of 144 grade 3 children. The AVI tasks have three basic components: v i s u a l s p a t i a l (VS), auditory temporal (AT), and v i s u a l temporal (VT) elements. Each component was presented i n two patterns, one i n the i n i t i a l or standard p o s i t i o n and one i n the f i n a l or comparison p o s i t i o n . Each component was then presented three times as the standard and three times as the comparison. The v i s u a l s p a t i a l stimulus pattern consisted of a ser i e s of dots ranging i n number from three to seven. They were arranged i n varying sized groups with short and long gaps between them (eg ). The standard and comparison pairs of s t i m u l i had the same number of dots but varied only i n arrangement (see Appendix D). These v i s u a l - s p a t i a l dot patterns were prepared on two series of s l i d e s , one f o r the VS standard and one for the VS comparison. There was a 2 second gap between the presentation of the standard stimulus and the comparison stimulus. The s l i d e s were projected on a screen by an auto-focus Kodak 76 OH carousel projector. The subject's>task was to state whether the comparison stimulus i n the p a i r was the same or d i f f e r e n t to the standard stimulus (see Appendix E). The auditory temporal stimulus pattern consisted of a ser i e s of beeps that were recorded on cassette tapes. They were s i m i l a r i n arrange- ment to the dot patterns with regard to standard and comparison conditions. The tapes (auditory temporal) were o r i g n a l l y made by Jarman (1977) but modified f o r the Marshall (1979) study. The beeps were recorded on cassette tapes and played on a Wollensak 3M tape recorder. The v i s u a l temporal stimulus patterns consisted of a series of flashes of l i g h t . They were s i m i l a r i n patterning to the v i s u a l s p a t i a l stimulus i n both standard and comparison conditions. The beeps from the the auditory temporal patterns were used as the t r i g g e r i n g mechanism to produce the v i s u a l temporal patterns of flashes of l i g h t . The flashes of l i g h t were produced from a small incandescent lamp. The subject's task i n a l l 9 tasks was to state whether the comparison stimulus was the same or d i f f e r e n t i n patterning to the standard. Matching Familiar Figures Test - Form F The MFFT i s a nonstandarized match-to-sample task. I t was constructed by Kagan and h i s associates (Kagan et a l . , 1964) to discern r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive responding s t y l e s based upon tasks involving a high degree of response uncertainty. I t i s operationalized by response time to the f i r s t s e l e c t i o n on each stimulus card and the number of errors. This instrument i s comprised of 12 items (10 test items and 2 p r a c t i c e items). The items are l i n e drawings of f a m i l i a r f igures (see Appendix A). Each item contains one standard and s i x v a r i a n t s . The c h i l d i s asked to select by pointing to the one variant that i s .identical to the standard. Materials The materials f o r the AVI tasks are: (a) a Wollensak 3M tape recorder, model 2520 (b) a Kodak 76 OH carousel s l i d e projector (c) scoring sheets (see Appendix E) (d) syn-cued projector and manual switching system used during the i n s t r u c t i o n a l phase of each matching session, (these were constructed at the U.B.C. I n s t r u c t i o n a l Media Centre). The materials for the MFFT administration are: (a) stopwatch (Heurer trackmaster, model 8042) or one s i m i l a r i n c a l i b r a t i o n (b) scoring sheets (see Appendix B). Procedure Marshall ( 1 9 7 9 ) met with the teachers involved i n h i s study. He gave them guidelines along with the administration manual for the Gates- MacGinitie Reading Test. The classroom teachers administered t h i s test and scoring was double checked by Marshall. Marshall both administered and scored the Canadian Lorge-Thorndike I n t e l l i g e n c e Test. The 1 4 4 subjects i n the Marshall study were separated (according to scores on the Gates-MacGinitie), into two reading groups, able and disabled readers. Each group consisted of 7 2 subjects, 3 6 g i r l s and 3 6 boys. The 1 4 4 subjects were then matched on i n t e l l i g e n c e (based on CLT scores) and chronological age. Ex post facto analysis showed that groups did not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n 1 . 0 . and chronological age. Each c h i l d that p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study was then randomly assigned a number from one to nine. That number determined the order of presentat- ion they would p a r t i c i p a t e i n according to the tables of complete sets of orthogonal L a t i n Squares (see Fisher & Yates, 1 9 7 3 , p. 7 2 ) . These tables gave an approximated counterbalanced order of presentations. Each matching task administered by Marshall took about 2 0 minutes. Testing was c a r r i e d out i n i s o l a t e d rooms with groups of one to s i x students. There were f i v e t e s t i n g sessions with each session (except the f i f t h ) involving the administration of two matching tasks. The t e s t i n g procedure involved introducing the AVI tasks to the p a r t i c i p a t i n g students, giving them examples, and f i n a l l y , adiministering the test items using a prepared s c r i p t (see Marshall, 1 9 7 9 , p p . 1 3 5 - 1 3 6 ) . Testing was started i n February and completed i n early June of 1 9 7 8 . Marshall ( 1 9 7 9 ) forwarded the data c o l l e c t e d on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, CLT, and the 9 AVI tasks to t h i s writer i n October, 1 9 7 8 . Schools p a r i c i p a t i n g i n the Marshall study were contacted for permission to do a continuation study. Seven schools responded favourably. From thes schools, 100 c h i l d r e n were made av a i l a b l e . The MFFT was administered by t h i s writer and one University of B r i t i s h Columbia student. The student was thoroughly trained i n test administration by t h i s examiner before t e s t i n g of the actual subjects began. The MFFT i s an i n d i v i d u a l l y administered test requiring 10-20 minutes Test administration was i n accordance with those set out by Kagan (see Appendix C). The administration setting required two chairs and a small table (4' X 6')set i n an i s o l a t e d area. Testing began i n early November and was completed by l a t e November of 1978. CHAPTER IV - -RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The concluding chapter i s divided into three major parts: (1) r e s u l t s , 2) discussion, and 3) summary and implications for future research. The r e s u l t s section i s further subdivided into two u n i t s - the f i r s t presenting a multiple regression analysis followed by a m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis of conceptual tempo. The multiple regression analysis was performed to c o n t r o l for the e f f e c t s that reading a b i l i t y , i n t e l l i g e n c e , sex, and chronological age may have exerted on task performance ( i . e . , 9 AVI tasks). This was done by s t a t i s t i c a l l y " p a r t i a l l i n g out" t h e i r e f f e c t s i n order to get a l e s s biased assessment of AVI task performance for r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive children. The multivariate analysis was performed to assess the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the findings. The second analysis consisted of a one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test and a Pearson product-moment c o r r e l a t i o n between the dependent measures and the vocabulary and comprehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. Part two was a post-hoc analysis. Results Part One: Data Analysis and Evaluation of Hypothesis. The focus of the present study was an attempt to discern what re l a t i o n s h i p ( i f any) existed between the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n - i m pulsivity and modality matching. On which task(s) did impulsives perform more poorly than t h e i r r e f l e c t i v e counterparts? The dependent measures used were comprised of the following i n t r a and intermodal matching tasks: 1) auditory-auditory (A-A), 2) auditory v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (A-VS), 3) v i s u a l - s p a t i a l auditory (VS-A), 4) visual-temporal v i s u a l - temporal (VT-VT), 5) v i s u a l - s p a t i a l visual-temporal (VS-VT), 6) visual-temporal v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (VT-VS), 7) auditory-temporal visual-temporal (AT-VT), 8) visual-temporal auditory-temporal (VT-AT), 9) v i s u a l - s p a t i a l v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (VS-VS). These tasks were considered to p a r a l l e l the reading process (Marshall, 1979; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). By noting the types of tasks (eg. v i s u a l - s p a t i a l , visual-temporal or auditory-tempora that impulsivesperformed more poorly than r e f l e c t i v e s , one might get an i n d i c a t i o n of the types of tasks that lead to reading d i f f i c u l t i e s for impulsive ch i l d r e n . The multiple regression analysis (see Appendix F) was computed using the 9 AVI tasks as dependent measures. The percentage of variance which was contributed by the subject variables was c a l - culated for each dependent measure. I t was found that the t o t a l variance so contributed by a l l subject variables to 9 AVI tasks was 13%. Results from the multiple regression analysis seemed to i n d i c a t e that AVI task performance was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y affected by the reading a b i l i t y , i n t e l l i g e n c e , sex or chronological age of the subjects involved i n t h i s study. The findings noted from the multiple regression analysis are not too s u r p r i s i n g since Marshall (1979) cont r o l l e d for the possible e f f e c t s of these subject v a r i a b l e s on AVI task performance by matching h i s subjects on each of these v a r i a b l e . That i s , there were an equal number of subjects who were above and below the mean on reading a b i l i t y , i n t e l l i g e n c e , 47 and chronological age as well as an equal number of boys and g i r l s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n Marshall's (1979) study. The multiple regression analysis was performed i n t h i s study because information about the subjects' background was not a v a i l a b l e to determine whether they had been completely matched on a l l the subject v a r i a b l e s . The reading measure used i n t h i s study (Gates-MacGinitie) yielded two sub-measures of reading - vocabulary and comprehension. Of a l l subject v a r i a b l e s , i t was found that the vocabulary v a r i a b l e affected AVI task performance the most (5%), so i t was used as a covariate i n a multivariate analysis of conceptual tempo. The gender of the subject or sex v a r i a b l e was used as a factor i n a m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis of conceptual tempo to check for possible i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s . The m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis then, was a 2 (sex) x 4 (conceptual tempo) mul t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s , with vocabulary used as a covariate. Table 3 presents the r e s u l t s of the 2 x 4 m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s . As indicated, the main e f f e c t s for sex and conceptual tempo were i n s i g n i f i c a n t (p>.05). In addition, there was no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t . Results c l e a r l y indicated that the four tempo groups ( r e f l e c t i v e s , slow inaccurates, fast accurates, and impulsives) did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y on any of the 9 AVI tasks. The research hypothesis then, was not supported by t h i s f i n d i n g , that i s , impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s did not appear to have any differences i n t h e i r perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . 48 Table 3 M u l t i v a r i a t e A n a l y s i s of Conceptual Tempo Source F df P r o b a b i l i t y 1.158 1 ,84 .334 1 .146 3 , 8 4 .290 1.359 3 , 8 4 .119 Sex Conceptual Tempo SXCT MS w i t h i n Adjusted f o r Covariate Variable^ 1 Variance Standard D e v i a t i o n 1. A-A 14 .693 3.833 2. A-VT 19.455 4 . 4 1 1 3 . A-VS 17.717 4.210 4 . VT-A 16 .284 4.035 5 . VT-VT 14 .338 3-787 6 . VT-VS 15.528 3 . 9 4 1 7. VS-A 14 .876 3.857 8. VS-VT 11.134 3.337 9. VS-VS 5.025 2 . 242 a df = 84 1 0 A-A a u d i t o r y - a u d i t o r y A-VT a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l temporal A-VS a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l s p a t i a l VT-A v i s u a l temporal-auditory VT-VT v i s u a l t e m p o r a l - v i s u a l temporal VT-VS v i s u a l t e m p o r a l - v i s u a l s p a t i a l VS-A v i s u a l s p a t i a l - a u d i t o r y VS-VT v i s u a l s p a t i a l - v i s u a l temporal VS-VS v i s u a l s p a t i a l - v i s u a l s p a t i a l 49 Part Two: Post-hoc Analysis In order to v e r i f y the r e s u l t s obtained from the m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis, a one way ANOVA was performed on the Gates-MacGinite Reading Test. Results (Tables 4 and 5) i n d i c a t e that of the four tempo groups, the r e f l e c t i v e s performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than the impulsives (p<;.01) on both measures of the Gates-MacGinitie (vocabulary and comprehension). The two other tempo groups, the fast accurates and slow inaccurates did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n reading performance from the r e f l e c t i v e s or impulsives. Nor were s i g n i f i c a n t differences noted between the four tempo groups on non-verbal I.Q. and chronological age (see Tables 6 and 7). A Pearson product-moment c o r r e l a t i o n was then computed to determine what r e l a t i o n s h i p existed between AVI and reading. Results (presented i n Appendix G) i n d i c a t e that a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p (p<^. 01) existed between the two sub-measures of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test (vocabulary and comprehension) and 8 of the 9 AVI tasks. This seems to i n d i c a t e that reading and AVI tasks are measuring something s i m i l a r , possibly reading a b i l i t y . The v i s u a l - s p a t i a l v i s u a l - s p a t i a l (VS-VS) task did not c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the vocabulary and comprehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. The VS-VS i s an intramodal i n t e g r a t i o n task r e q u i r i n g a subject to discriminate between d i f f e r e n t graphic symbols. Judging from the subjects' raw scores, which indicated very few errors on the VS-VS task, discriminating graphic symbols did not seem to be d i f f i c u l t task for these subjects. That i s , these subjects seemed to have already mastered the s k i l l of discriminating between 50 •Table 4 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on the Vocabulary Subtest of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Source df SS MS F P Conceptual Tempo between 3 972.226 324.079 4.998 0.003 within 89 5771.477 64.849 t o t a l 92 6743.742 Table 5 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on the Comprehension Subtest of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test Source df SS MS F P Conceptual Tempo between 3 1664.313 544.770 6.871 0.000 within 89 7185.652 80.738 t o t a l 92 8849.965 Note. Scheffe's test indicated that s i g n i f i c a n t differences existed only between r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives and not f o r the other two groups (fast accurates and slow inaccurates) on the Vocabulary and Comprehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. Table 6 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on the Non-Verbal I.Q. Measure Source df SS MS F P Conceptual Tempo between 3 50.230 16.743 0.195 0.899 within 89 7635.293 85.790 t o t a l 92 7685.523 Table 7 Analysis of Variance Summary for Conceptual Tempo on Chronological Age Source df SS MS F P Conceptual Tempo between 3 26.473 8.824 0.584 0.627 within 89 1345.097 15.113 t o t a l 92 1371.570 graphic symbols (as based upon low error scores on VS-VS task). The discrimination of graphic symbols (VS-VS) i s a basic s k i l l necessary only for beginning reading (Birch & Belmont, 1964; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Strang, 1968). It seemed t h i s s k i l l no longer played an important r o l e for these subjects i n the reading process. The r e l a t i v e s i m p l i c i t y of the VS-VS task was also noted by Marshall (1979), Rudnick et a l . (1972), and S t e r r i t t et a l . (1971). A summary of the r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e the following: 1) the v a r i a b l e s of sex and conceptual tempo did not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t performance on any of the 9 audio-visual i n t e g r a t i o n tasks. Nor was there a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n among these v a r i a b l e s ; 2) r e f l e c t i v e subjects scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than impulsiveson the vocabulary and comprehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test; 3) s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s were found to exist between vocabulary and comprehension on 8 of the 9 audio-visual i n t e g r a t i o n tasks. Discussion Research findings have implicated the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y i n a v a r i e t y of "learning problems". Impulsives have been noted to perform more poorly than r e f l e c t i v e s i n reading (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1971; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Readence, 1976; Shapiro, 1976), i n math (Cathcart & Liedthke, 1969), and i n scanning and decoding of graphic symbols (Kilburg et a l . , 1973; Nelson, 1969; Siegel et a l . , 1973; Siegelman, 1969). Impulsives were also noted to manifest behaviours c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of h y p e r a c t i v i t y , have a t t e n t i o n a l d e f i c i t s , emotional problems and an assortment of other problems that hinder learning (see Epstein et a l . , 1975). When scanning strategies were analysed, i t was noted that impulsives ignored two and one-half times as many a l t e r n a t i v e s on the MFFT than r e f l e c t i v e s (Drake, 1970; Siegelman, 1969). They also devoted proportionately more time looking at a l t e r n a t i v e s observed most and t h e i r f i n a l s e l e c t i o n . When scanning strategies were taught (McLauchlan, 1976; Siegel et a l . , 1973; Zelniker et a l . , 1972) along with modelling and s e l f - v e r b a l i z a t i o n techniques (Meichanbaum & Goodman, 1971), i t was noted that task performance improved r a p i d l y . Considering that a v a r i e t y of factors (eg. perceptual organization, anxiety, attention, scanning s t r a t e g i e s , etc.) may have been factors contributing to reading impairment, t h i s study only focused on the factor of perceptual organization. The current research then, began with the proposal that d e f i c i t s i n reading a b i l i t y of impulsive c h i l d r e n might be traced to inadequate perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . To test t h i s , nine combinations of a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l temporal-spatial sensory i n t e g r a t i o n tasks were used, since they were considered to p a r a l l e l the reading process (Marshall, 1979; Meuhl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971). Research on reading and AVI have noted that better readers perform s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than poorer readers on AVI tasks (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Marshall, 1979; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). They noted that the v i s u a l s p a t i a l matchings to be the least d i f f i c u l t ; the combined v i s u a l s p a t i a l and and temporal matchings (VS-A, A-VS, VS-VT, VT-VS) to be moderately d i f f i c u l t . The v i s u a l s p a t i a l and temporal matchings are tasks requiring the c h i l d to i d e n t i f y sounds made by d i f f e r e n t graphic symbols (A-VS) and i t s converse procedure (VS-A). A d d i t i o n a l l y , the temporal matching tasks require the v i s u a l recognition of graphic symbols while moving along a l i n e of p r i n t (VS-VT) and i t s converse procedure (VT-VS). Studies by Byrden (1972), Marshall (1979), Rudnick et a l . (1972) and S t e r r i t t et a l . (1971) noted that the tempral matchings (AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VT, A-A) seem to be the most d i f f i c u l t . These l a t t e r tasks require associating the auditory patterns i n speech to the appropriate graphic symbols i n p r i n t (which are s p a t i a l l y organized) as one i s moving along a l i n e of p r i n t (AT-VT), and i t s converse procedure (VT-AT). The VT-VT i s simply a task which requires moving along a l i n e of p r i n t . From the above discussion, one could speculate that the temporal matchings (AT-VT, VT-AT, VT-VT, A-A) would be the tasks which best d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers, while the combined v i s u a l s p a t i a l and temporal matchings (VS-A, A-VS, VS-VT, VT-VT) would be tasks which probably d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers the l e a s t (except for the VS-VS task). Results from the multivariate analysis indicated that the four tempo groups did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e on any of the 9 AVI tasks. Since AVI tasks are supposed to d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers (Marshall, 1979, Rudnick et a l . , S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971) r e s u l t s from the above analysis indicates the 4 tempo groups Hid not d i f f e r e n t i a t e i n reading a b i l i t y . A post-hoc a n a l y s i s , however, indicated that r e f l e c t i v e s performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than impulsives on the vocabulary and comprehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test. One possible explanation f o r discrepant findings noted above i s that the Gates-MacGinitie and the AVI tasks may be measuring d i f f e r e n t s k i l l s . A Pearson product- moment c o r r e l a t i o n , however, indicated that the vocabulary and comprehension subtests of the Gates-MacGinitie and 8 of the 9 AVI tasks were s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d . Results from the above analyses then, seem to in d i c a t e the following: 1) Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test and AVI tasks are s i g n i f i c a n t l y related and 2) r e f l e c t i v e and impulsives d i f f e r e n t i a t e d on the Gates-MacGinitie but not on the AVI tasks. As noted e a r l i e r , AVI task performance d i f f e r e n t i a t e d good and poor readers (Birch & Belmont, 1964, 1965; Beery, 1967; Kahn & Birch, 1967; Marshall, 1979; S t e r r i t t & Rudnick, 1966). S i m i l a r l y , the R-I dimension d i f f e r e n t i a t e d good and poor readers (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1971; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Kagan, 1965b; Readence, 1976; Shapiro, 1976). Since these r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that AVI tasks and the R-I dimension can both d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers but do not seem to be relat e d to one another, ( i . e . there was no d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of r e f l e c t i v e s or impulsives on any AVI tasks), the following explanations can be put f o r t h : 1) AVI tasks are rela t e d to reading, 2) the R-I dimension i s rela t e d to reading, but, 3) there appears to be no re l a t i o n s h i p between performance on AVI tasks and performance on the MFFT. The R-I dimension and the AVI tasks both possess s k i l l s that are s i m i l a r to those;'.required i n reading, but they do seem to possess s k i l l s common with each other. I f the AVI tasks are assessing the 56 perceptual organization mechanisms that are involved i n the process of reading, then the r e s u l t s from t h i s study i n d i c a t e that reading d e f i c i e n c i e s i n impulsive c h i l d r e n are not based i n t h e i r perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . If the AVI tasks are not assessing perceptual organization mechanisms involved i n the process of reading,deficiencies i n impulsive c h i l d r e n may be due to t h e i r d e f i c i e n c i e s i n perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . The l a t t e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n seems possible based on the assumption that even though AVI tasks d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers, these tasks may do so on factors other than perceptual organization. If the basis of the above i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s correct, then i t i s d i f f i c u l t to speculate what the nature of the AVI tasks are, that i s , what they are a c t u a l l y assessing. If AVI tasks are assessing perceptual organization, then reading d e f i c i e n c i e s i n impulsive c h i l d r e n may be due to factors other than perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . While there may be many such factors (eg. motivation, memory, anxiety, e t c . ) , one factor worth i n v e s t i g a t i n g i s attention. The l i t e r a t u r e on scanning strategies has noted that impulsives ignored two and one-half times as many alternates on the MFFT than r e f l e c t i v e s (Drake, 1970; Sigelman, 1969). Epstein et a l . (1975) a t t r i b u t e the i n e f f i c i e n t scanning s t r a t e g i e s of impulsive c h i l d r e n noted by Drake (1970) and Sigelman (1969) to impulsives' i n a b i l i t y to sustain a t t e n t i o n . Zelniker et a l . (1972) found support for t h i s hypothesis by nothing that when impulsives were given longer time to respond to a task, t h e i r performance decreased. Zelniker et a l . (1972) i n a further study, measured v i s u a l scanning s t r a t e g i e s on the MFFT using a video-tape recorder. They noted that r e f l e c t i v e s had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher frequency and duration of observation. Zelniker et a l . (1972) concluded that "...the i n a b i l i t y to sustain attention i s one of a number of behaviors that would be appropriate i n a denotative d e f i n i t i o n of i m p u l s i v i t y " (p.335). Investigating a t t e n t i o n a l d e f i c i t s i n impulsive c h i l d r e n as one source of v a r i a t i o n e f f e c t i n g reading performance may be a possible avenue of future research i n exploring reading problems. Summary and Implications for Future Research This study attempted to assess whether d e f i c i e n c i e s i n reading a b i l i t y of impulsive c h i l d r e n might be traced to inadequate perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . The r a t i o n a l e was derived from the l i t e r a t u r e on scanning s t r a t e g i e s . I t was noted that impulsive ch i l d r e n were i n e f f i c i e n t i n scanning and decoding of graphic symbols (Kilburg & S i e g e l , 1973; Nelson, 1969; S i e g e l , K e i a s i c & K i l b u r g , 1973; Sigelman, 1969). It was hypothesized that the i n e f f i c i e n t scanning strategies employed by impulsive c h i l d r e n on complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i might be.factors which contributed to t h e i r reading d e f i c i e n c i e s (Butler, 1972; Davey, 1972; Hood & Kendall, 1974; Readence, 1976; Shapiro, 1976). To test t h i s , nine combinations of a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l temporal-spatial i n t e g r a t i o n tasks were employed. These 9 tasks were devised by Jarman (1977) and constructed by Marshall (1979). The 9 AVI tasks were thought to p a r a l l e l the process of reading (Beery, 1967; Marshall, 1979; Muehl & Kremenak, 1966; Rudnick et a l . , 1972; S t e r r i t t et a l . , 1971) and as such, they were 58 assumed to assess the perceptual mechanisms en t a i l e d i n reading. In t h i s way, we might be able to trace differences i n reading performance of r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n to t h e i r differences i n perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i . Results from the m u l t i v a r i a t e analysis of conceptual tempo indicated no s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t . That i s , the four tempo groups ( r e f l e c t i v e s , slow accurates, fast accurates, and impulsives) did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y on any of the 9 AVI tasks. That i s , d e f i c i e n c i e s i n reading performance of impulsive c h i l d r e n could not be traced to t h e i r perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i as operationalized by the 9 AVI tasks. An a l t e r n a t i v e p o s s i b i l i t y i s that i f the 9 AVI tasks were not assessing perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i , then researchers may wish to pursue the perceptual organization hypothesis using other sets of tasks which purport to assess perceptual organization. If the 9 AVI tasks were assessing the perceptual organization of complex v i s u a l s t i m u l i as r e l a t e d to the reading process, then f a c t o r ( s ) other than perceptual organization need to be considered i n explaining d e f i c i e n c i e s i n reading performance of impulsive c h i l d r e n . One such factor might be a t t e n t i o n a l d e f i c i t s . A review by Epstein et a l . (1975) c i t e s studies (eg. Drake, 1970; Sigelman, 1969; Zelniker et a l . , 1972) which lend support to the notion that a t t e n t i o n a l d e f i c i t s i n impulsive c h i l d r e n may be sources of v a r i a t i o n e f f e c t i n g task performance. Further i n v e s t i g a t i o n exploring the a t t e n t i o n a l d e f i c i t s hypothesis may be f r u i t f u l . The r e s u l t s from the multivariate analysis of conceptual tempo seem s u r p r i s i n g i n view of the f a c t that performance on the MFFT and performance on the AVI tasks can both d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers, but r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives did not d i f f e r e n t i a t e on any of the 9 AVI tasks. This seems to i n d i c a t e that the AVI tasks and the MFFT are both r e l a t e d to reading i n some manner, but there seems to be no r e l a t i o n s h i p between them. It would seem more expedient for researchers then, to use the MFFT as opposed to the 9 AVI tasks i f they wished to d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers. This could save them an invaluable amount of time since the MFFT takes about 15 minutes to administer i n comparison to 4 hours for the 9 AVI tasks. However, i f diagnostic information were required about sources of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s ( i . e . inadequate i n t e g r a t i o n of auditory- temporal, visual-temporal or v i s u a l - s p a t i a l tasks), then the 9 AVI tasks may be more su i t a b l e . I t i s assumed here that information received from AVI task performance i s i n f a c t diagnostic and not j u s t spurious information. F i n a l l y , researchers may wish to employ a more r e l i a b l e form of the MFFT. The low r e l i a b i l i t y of the MFFT, although not investigated i n t h i s study, i s of concern to t h i s w riter. I t i s the opinion of t h i s writer that future researchers consider employing a more r e l i a b l e form of the MFFT. The current MFFT used (form F) has a t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y of .52 (Ault et a l . , 1976; Egeland & Weinberg, 1976). More recently, Cairns and Cammock (1978) have developed a more r e l i a b l e form of the MFFT. This instrument contains 20 items, with a two week s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y of .91 for latency and .89 for errors. A t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y over a f i v e week period yielded a c o e f f i c i e n t of .85 for latency and .77 for e r r o r s . Using such an instrument would make the dicotomization of subjects i n t o r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives more r e l i a b l e . In summary, the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the R-I dimension, and AVI needs to be investigated further. By d i l e n a t i n g the above re l a t i o n s h i p we may be able to make some comment regarding the v a l i d i t y of the perceptual organization hypothesis. In t h i s way, we w i l l be one step closer i n knowing the factor(s) contributing or not contributing to reading d e f i c i e n c i e s i n impulsive c h i l d r e n . REFERENCE NOTE 1.) Marshall, M. Personal communication, Oct. 5, 1978. REFERENCES Abravenel, E. The development of intersensory patterning with regard to selected s p a t i a l dimensions. Monographs of the Society for Research i n Chi l d Development, 1968, 33 (2, S e r i a l No. 118). Ault, R., M i t c h e l l , C. & Hartmann, D. Some methodological problems i n r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y research. Child Development, 1976, 47, 227-231. Becker, J. & Sabatine, D. R e l i a b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l t e s t s of perception administered u t i l i z i n g group techniques. Journal of C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1971, 27_, 86-88. Beery, J. Matching of auditory and v i s u a l s t i m u l i by average and retarded readers. Child Development, 1967, 38, 827-833. Birch, H. & Belmont, L. Auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n i n normal and retarded readers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1964, 34, 852-861. Birch, H. & Belmont, L. Auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n , i n t e l l i g e n c e and reading a b i l i t y i n school c h i l d r e n . Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1965, 20, 295-305. ; Block, J . , Block, J . , & Harrington, D. Some misgivings about the Matching Familiar Figures Test as a measure of r e f l e c t i o n - i mpulsivity. Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10(5), 611-632. Bond, G. Auditory and speech c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of good and poor readers. Teachers College Contributions to Education, 1935, 429. Brannigan, G. & Ash, T. Cognitive temp and WISC-R performance. C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1977, 33(1), 212. Briggs, C. & Weinberg, R. E f f e c t s of reinforcement i n t r a i n i n g children's conceptual tempo. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973, 65, 383-394. Bryden, M. Auditory-visual and s e q u e n t i a l - s p a t i a l matching i n r e l a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y . Child Development, 1972, 4_3, 824-832. Buros, O.K. The seventh mental yearbook, v o l . I I , New Jersey: Gryphon, 1972. Butler, L. A p s y c h o l l n g u i s t l c analysis of the o r a l reading behavior of selected impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e second grade boys. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Ohio State University,1972. Cairns, E. & Cammock, T. Development of a more r e l i a b l e version of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Developmental Psychology, 1978, 14(5), 555-560 Campbell, D. & Fiske, D. Convergent and discriminant v a l i d a t i o n by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1959, 56, 81-105. Cathcart, G. & Liedke, W. Reflectiveness/impulsiveness and mathematics achievement. Arithmetic Teacher, 1969, 3_6_, 563-567. C h r i s t i n e , D. & C h r i s t i n e C. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of auditory d i s c r i m i n a t i o n to a r t i c u l a t o r ^ defects and reading retardation. Elementary School Journal, 1964, 11, 97-100. Davey, B. A p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n of cognitive s t y l e s of o r a l reading s t r a t e g i e s i n achieving and understanding fourth grade boys. (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , 1971). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts International, 1972, 32_, 4414A. Debus, R. E f f e c t s of b r i e f observation of model behavior on conceptual tempo of impulsive c h i l d r e n . Developmental Psychology, 1970 2, 22-32. Denney, D. Modeling e f f e c t s upon conceptual s t y l e and cognitive tempo. Child Development, 1972, 43., 105-119. Denney, D. R e f l e c t i o n and i m p u l s i v i t y as determinants of conceptual strategy. C h i l d Development, 1973, 44, 614-623. Derevensky, J.L. Crossmodal functioning and reading achievement. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1977, 9, 233-251. Drake, D. Perceptual correlates of impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e behavior. Developmental Psychology, 1970, 2, 202-214. Egeland, B. & Weinberg, R. The Matching Familiar Figures Test: a look at i t s psychometric c r e d i b i l i t y . C h i l d Development, 1976, 47, 483-491. Epstein, M., Hallahan, D. & Kauffman, J. Implications of the r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y dimension for s p e c i a l education. The Journal of Special Education. 1975. 9. 11-25. Eska, B. & Black, K. Conceptual tempo i n young grade-school children. C h i l d Development, 1971, 42, 505-516. Fisher, R. & Yates, F. S t a t i s t i c a l tables for b i o l o g i c a l , a g r i c u l t u r a l and medical research, (4th ed.). London: O l i v e r & Boyd, 1953. Ford, M. Auditory-visual and t a c t u a l - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n i n r e l a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y . Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1967, 2_4, 531-541 Friedes, D. Human information processing and sensory modality: Cross-modal functions, information complexity, memory, and d e f i c i t s . Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1974, 81, 284-310. Gaudry, E. & Speilberger, C. Anxiety and educational achievement. S. A u s t r a l i a : The G r i f f i n Press, 1971. Goldent, N. & Steiner, S. Auditory and v i s u a l functions i n good and poor readers. Journal of Learning D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1969, 2(9), 476-481. Goodnow, J. Matching auditory and v i s u a l s e r i e s : modality problem or t r a n s l a t i o n problem? Ch i l d Development, 1971, 42_, 1187-1201 Gupta, P. Correlates of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y . Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , University of Alberta, 1970. H a l l , V. & Russell, W. Multitrait-multimethod analysis of conceptual tempo. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 932-939. Hood, J. & Kendall, J . A quantitative analysis of o r a l reading miscues on r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive second graders. ED 092880, 1974. Jarman, R. A method of construction of auditory stimulus patterns for use i n crossmodal and intramodal matching t e s t s . Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1977, 9(1), 22-25(a). Jarman, R. Patterns of crossmodal and intramodal matching among i n t e l l i g e n c e groups. In P. M i t t l e r (Ed.), Research to p r a c t i c e i n mental retardation. (Vo. I I ) . Baltimore: U n i v e r s i t y Park Press, 1977(b). Jones, B. & Connolly, K. Memory e f f e c t s i n crossmodal matching. B r i t i s h Journal of Psychology, 1970, 61, 267-270. Jorgenson, G. & Hyde, E. Auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n and reading performance i n lower s o c i a l class c h i l d r e n . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 718-725. 64 Kagan, J. Monographs: basic cognitive process i n c h i l d r e n . Chicago, 111.: C h i l d Development Publications, 1963. Kagan, J. Impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e c h i l d r e n : s i g n i f i c a n c e of conceptual tempo. In: J.D. Krumkoltz (Ed.), Learning and the educational process. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965, pp. 133-161(a). Kagan, J. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and reading a b i l i t y i n primary grade c h i l d r e n . Child Development, 1965, 36, 609-629(b). Kagan, J. Developmental studies i n r e f l e c t i o n and a n a l y s i s . In: A. Kidd & J. Rivoire (Eds.), Perceptual development i n c h i l d r e n . New York: International U n i v e r s i t i e s Press, 1966. Kagan, J. & Kogan, N. Individual v a r i a t i o n i n cognitive processes. In: P. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of c h i l d psychology, (Vol. I ) . New York: Wiley, 1970. Kagan, J . , Moss, H. & S i g e l , I. Psychological s i g n i f i c a n c e of s t y l e s of conceptualization. In J . Wright & J . Kagan (Eds.), Basic cognitive processes i n c h i l d r e n . Monographs of the society for research i n c h i l d development, 1963, 28_(2, No. 86), 73-124. Kagan, J . , Pearson, L., & Welch, L. Conceptual im p u l s i v i t y and inductive reasoning. Child Development, 1966, 37, 583-594(a). Kagan, J . , Pearson, L., & Welch, L. M o d i f i a b i l i t y of an impulsive tempo. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1966, 5_7, 359-365(b). Kagan, J . , Rosman, B., Day, D., A l b e r t , J . , & P h i l l i p s , W. Information processing i n the c h i l d : s i g n i f i c a n c e of a n a l y t i c and r e f l e c t i v e a t t i t u d e s . Psychological Monographs, 1964, 7_8 (1, S e r i a l #578). Kahn, D. & B i r c h , H. Development of auditory v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n and reading achievement. Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1967, 27_, 459-468. Kilburg, R. & S i e g e l , A. D i f f e r e n t i a l feature analysis i n the recognition memory performance of r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive chi l d r e n . Memory and Cognition, 1973, 10(9), 564-572. Klapper, Z. & Birch, H. Developmental course of temporal patterning i n v i s i o n and audition. Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1971, 32, 547-555. Lee, L., Kagan, J . , & Robson, A. Influence for a preference for a n a l y t i c categorization upon concept a c q u i s i t i o n . Child Development, 1963, 34, 433-442 Lewis, M., Rausch, M., Goldberg, S. & Dodd, C. Error response time and I.Q.: sex differences i n cognitive s t y l e of preschool ch i l d r e n . Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1968, 26,563-568. Magnusson, D. Test theory. Menlo PI., C a l i f o r n i a : Addison- Wesley Publishing Co., 1967. Margolis, H. Relationship between audit o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n , reading readiness, and conceptual tempo. Journal of Psychology, 1976, 93, 181-189. Marshall, M. Auditory-visual and s p a t i a l temporal i n t e g r a t i o n a b i l i t i e s of able and disabled readers. Unpublished manuscrip 1979. (Available from U.B.C., Faculty of Education.) McLauchlan, D. Modifying the task strategies of impulsive c h i l d r e n Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Alberta, 1976 Meichenbaum, D. & Goodman, J . Training impulsive c h i l d r e n to ta l k to themselves: a means of developing s e l f - c o n t r o l . Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 77_, 115-126. Messer, S. The e f f e c t s of anxiety over i n t e l l e c t u a l performance on r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n . Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , 1968. Messer, S. The e f f e c t s of anxiety over i n t e l l e c t u a l performance on r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y i n ch i l d r e n . Child Development, 1970, 41, 723-735. Messer, S. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y : a review. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1976, 83(6), 1026-1052. Mischel, W. Continuity and change i n personality. American Psychologist, 1969, 24, 1012-1018. Mol l i c k , L. & Messer, S. The r e l a t i o n of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y to i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s . The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1978, 132, 157-158. Muehl, S. & Kremenak, S. A b i l i t y to match information within and between auditory and v i s u a l sense modalities and subsequent reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1966, 57, 230-238. Neisser, A. Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, 1967. Nelson, T. The e f f e c t s of t r a i n i n g i n att e n t i o n deployment on observing behavior i n r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts, 1969, 29, 2659B. Neussele, W. R e f l e c t i v i t y as an influence on focusing behavior of c h i l d r e n . Journal of Experimental C h i l d Psychology, 1972, 14, 883-891. 66 Pick, H. Systems of perceptual and perceptual motor development. In: J.P. H i l l (Ed.), Minnesota symposia on c h i l d psychology, Vol. 4. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1970. Plomin, R. & Buss, A. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e . Psychological Reports, 1973, _33, 726 Rae, G. Relation of auditory v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n to reading and i n t e l l i g e n c e . Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1977, 97_, 3-8. Readence, J. Cognitive s t y l e and o r a l reading behavior of t h i r d grade c h i l d r e n . Reading Improvement, 1976, ji l _ , 175-181. Re a l i , N. & H a l l , V. E f f e c t s of success and f a i l u r e on the r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d . Developmental Psychology, 1970, 3_i 392-402. R e i l l y , D. Auditory-visual i n t e g r a t i o n , sex, and reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971, 81, 175-181. Rudnick, M. , S t e r r i t t , G. & Flax, M. Auditory and v i s u a l rhythm perception and reading a b i l i t y . Child Development, 1967, 38, 581-587. Rudnick, M. , Martin, V. & S t e r r i t t , G. On the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y of auditory and v i s u a l , temporal and s p a t i a l , i n t e g r a t i v e and non-integrative sequential pattern comparisons. Psychonomic Science, 1972, 2_7, 207-210. Seigel, A. , K e i a s i c , K. & K i l b u r g , R. Recognition memory i n r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive preschool ch i l d r e n . Child Development, 1973, 44, 651-656. Seigelman, E. R e f l e c t i v e and impulsive observing behavior. C h i l d Development, 1969, 40, 1213-1222. Shapiro, J. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of conceptual tempo to reading readiness test performance. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1976, 8(1), 83-87. Stennett, R. , Smithe, P. & Hardy, M. Language background, guessing, mastery and type of error i n beginning reading. Alberta Journal of Education Research, 1972, 18(3), 180-189. S t e r r i t t , G., Martin, V. & Rudnick, M. Auditory-visual and temporal-spatial i n t e g r a t i o n as determinants of test d i f f i c u l t y . Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 289-291. S t e r r i t t , G. & Rudnick, M. Auditory and v i s u a l rhythm perception i n r e l a t i o n to reading a b i l i t y i n fourth grade boys. Perceptual and Motor S k i l l s , 1966, 22, 859-864. Strang, R. S k i l l f u l teaching: theory and p r a c t i c e . In: J . F i g u r e l (Ed.), Forging ahead i n reading. Delaware: Inter- n a t i o n a l Reading Association, 1968. Ward, W. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y i n kindergarten ch i l d r e n . Child Development, 1968, 39, 867-874. Weiner, A. & Adams, W. The e f f e c t of f a i l u r e and f r u s t r a t i o n on r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive ch i l d r e n . Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1974, 17, 353-359.- Wolfe, L. D i f f e r e n t i a l factors i n s p e c i f i c reading d i s a b i l i t y . Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1941, _58̂  57-62. Yando, R. & Kagan, J. The e f f e c t of teacher tempo on the c h i l d . C h i l d Development, 1968, 39, 27-34. Zelniker, T., J e f f r e y , W., Ault, R. & Parsons, J . Analysis and modification of search strategies of impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e c h i l d r e n on the Matching Familiar Test. C h i l d Development. 1972, 43_, 321-335. APPENDIX A Sample item from MFFT 69 A P P E N D I X A APPENDIX B Scoring sheet f o r MFFT MATCHING FAMILIAR FIGURES TEST Examiner: Examinee:, Sex: M School: Grade: Year Month Day Date of Test: Birthday: Age: Item: l)House (1) Time:_ Choice: IV 2) 3) _4) 5) 6 ) _ 2)Scissor (2) Time: Choice:!) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 3)Phone (3) Time: Choice:!) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6 ) . 5) Tree (2) Time: 6) Leaf (6) Time: 4)Bear (4) Time: Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) _ Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) _ Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Cat (3) Time: Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 8) Dress (5) Time:_ Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 9) G i r a f f e (4) Time: Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)_ 10) Lamp (5) Time: Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)_ 11) Boat (2) Time:_ _ Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6 ) _ 12)Cowboy (4) Time: Choice: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Total Time: Total Correct: T o t a l Error: APPENDIX C Directions f o r administering the MFFT 73 APPENDIX C DIRECTIONS FOR MATCHING FAMILIAR FIGURES "I am going to show you a p i c t u r e of something you know and then some p i c t u r e s that look l i k e i t . You w i l l /have to p o i n t to the p i c t u r e on t h i s bottom page (point) t h a t i s j u s t l i k e the one on t h i s top page ( p o i n t ) . Let's do some f o r p r a c t i c e . " E shows p r a c t i c e items and helps the c h i l d to f i n d the c o r r e c t answer. "Now we are going to do some tha t are a l i t t l e b i t harder. You w i l l see a p i c t u r e on top and. s i x p i c t u r e s on the bottom. F i n d the one that i s j u s t l i k e the one on top and p o i n t to i t . " E w i l l r ecord l a t e n c y to f i r s t response to the h a l f - second, t o t a l number of e r r o r s f o r each item and the order i n which the e r r o r s are made. I f S i s c o r r e c t , E w i l l p r a i s e . I f wrong, E w i l l say, "No, t h a t i s not the r i g h t one. F i n d the one t h a t i s j u s t l i k e t h i s one ( p o i n t ) . " Continue to code responses (not times) u n t i l c h i l d makes a maximum of s i x e r r o r s or gets the item c o r r e c t . I f i n c o r r e c t , E w i l l show the r i g h t answer. \ I t i s necessary to have a stand to place the t e s t book- l e t on so t h a t both the stimulus and the a l t e r n a t i v e s are c l e a r l y v i s i b l e to the S at the same time. The two pages should be p r a c t i c a l l y at r i g h t angles to one another. Note: I t i s d e s i r a b l e to enclose each page i n c l e a r p l a s t i c i n order to keep the pages c l e a n . 74 APPENDIX D Matching task stimulus patterns i n AVI tasks APPENDIX D I T EM NUMBER S T I M U L U S C O M P A R I S O N SAME (S )/ DIFFERENT(D) EXAMPLES 1 • • • • • • S 2 • • • • • • D 3 • • • • • • D 4 • • • • • • S S • • • • • • 0 TEST ITEMS 6 • • • • • • • • S 7 • • • • • • • • D 8 • • • • • • • • D 9 • • • • • • • • S 10 • • • • • • • • D II • • • • • • • • S 12 • • • • • • • • S 13 • • • • • •• • • D 14 • • • • • • • • • • S 15 • • • • • REST • • • • • REST S 16 • • • • • • • • • • 0 17 • • • • • • • • • • 0 18 • • • • • • • • • • S 19 • • • • • • • • • • 0 20 • • • • • • • • • • S  77 APPENDIX E Scoring sheet for AVI matching task stimulus patterns APPENDIX , same d i f f e r e n t 2 same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t j il same d i f f e r e n t „ same d i f f e r e n t 5 g same d i f f e r e n t y same d i f f e r e n t g same d i f f e r e n t ^ same d i f f e r e n t •̂ Q same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t ^2 same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t ^ same d i f f e r e n t , s a m e d i f f e r e n t 15 • REST same d i f f e r e n t ^ same d i f f e r e n t 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Name: same d i f f e r e n t 26 35 same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t REST same d i f f e r e n t same d i f f e r e n t APPENDIX F Mul t i p l e Regression Analysis APPENDIX P The Amount of Variance Accounted f o r ̂ biy.sSna:k;j:ec&xV-SMacWles f o r each Dependent Measure Dependent Measures NuSulsvfe^t Va r i a b l e s T o t a l Sex I . Q . Vocabulary C h r o n o l o g i c a l Comprehension Age 1 . A-A . 0 9 4 0 . 0 9 4 0 2 . A-VT . 0 4 5 9 . 0 2 9 3 . 0 8 6 7 . 1 6 1 8 3 . A-VS . 1 1 3 2 . 1 1 3 2 4 . VT-A . 1278 .0241 . 1 5 1 9 5 . VT-VT . 0 7 2 6 . 1 5 1 1 . 2 2 3 7 6 . VT-VS . 0 4 4 4 .1541 . 1 9 8 5 7 . VS-A . 1 0 3 9 . 1 0 3 9 8 . VS-VT . 0 3 0 9 . 0 3 0 5 . 0 8 6 1 .1475 9 . VS-VS . 0 3 1 9 . 0 3 1 9 T o t a l .1494 . 1 3 6 1 .4985 .4184 .0241 1 . 2 2 6 4 Percentage . 0 1 6 . 0 1 5 . 0 5 .04 . 0 0 2 6 . 1 3 APPENDIX G I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n of AVI Tasks and Reading Measures APPENDIX fi I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s of AVI Tasks and Reading Measures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 . A-A - . 5 5 3 * * . 6 1 0 * * . 5 6 8 * * . 6 1 2 * * . 6 0 5 * * . 4 8 5 * * . 6 2 5 * * . 4 3 0 * * - . 3 0 7 * * - . 2 8 3 * 2 . A-VT . 6 2 0 * * . 6 6 8 * * . 6 0 1 * * . 4 3 4 * * . 4 4 . 6 * * . 4 1 6 * * . 4 1 3 * * - - . 2 9 5 * - 2 . 6 8 * 3 . A-VS - . 5 8 7 * * . 5 0 1 * * . 5 6 1 * * . 5 4 7 * * . 4 8 0 * * . 2 6 8 * - . 3 1 7 * * - . 3 3 7 * * 4 . VT-A - . 5 8 0 * * . 4 7 6 * * .418** . 3 5 3 * * . 3 5 4 * * - . 3 5 8 * * - . 3 5 5 * * 5 . VT-VT - . 5 1 5 * * . 4 8 0 * * . 4 8 7 * * . 3 8 3 * * - . 3 5 4 * * - . 3 8 9 * * 6 . VT-VS - . 5 9 7 * * . 5 3 9 * * • 3 5 5 * * - . 3 5 9 * * - . 3 9 3 * * 7 . VS-A - . 4 4 3 * * . 5 1 7 * * - . 3 2 2 * * - . 3 1 4 * * 8 . VS-VT - . 4 2 4 * * - . 2 9 4 * - . 2 7 8 * 9 . VS-VS - - . 1 0 5 - . 1 3 0 1 0 . Vocabulary - . 8 3 4 * * 1 1 . Comprehension - a n=93 * p < . 0 5 *# p < . 0 0 1

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 5 17
United States 2 7
France 1 0
Russia 1 0
Japan 1 0
City Views Downloads
Beijing 5 0
Unknown 3 14
Tokyo 1 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items